Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
03/03/2003
B A K E R S F I E L D David Couch, Chair Sue Benham Mike Maggard Staff: John W. Stinson URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING of the City Council - City of Bakersfield Monday, March 3, 2003 3:00 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room, Suite 201 Second Floor - City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. ADOPT FEBRUARY 3, 2003 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 4. DEFERRED BUSINESS A. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding Transportation Development Fees- Rojas B. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding group homes- Hardisty 5. NEW BUSINESS A. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding northeast bluffs steep-slope issues - Hardisty B. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding off-road vehicle recreational facility - Christensen C. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding possible special meeting dates - Stinson 6. COMMITTEE COMMENTS 7. ADJOURNMENT S:~JOHN~Council Committees\Urban Development 2003\ud03marO3.doc B AKE R S FIEL D Alan Tandy, City Manager Sue Benham Staff: John W. Stinson Mike Maggard AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMII'rEE Monday, February 3, 2003, 3:00 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room - City Hall 1. ROLL CALL The'meeting was called to order at 3:06 p.m. Present: Councilmembers David Couch, Chair; Sue Benham and Mike Maggard 2. ADOPT OCTOBER-7, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Adopted as submitted. 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS Committee Chair David Couch stated the Committee received a request to defer items 4.A and 5.A. The Chair's recommendation was to proceed with the agenda. Staff was directed to provide a copy of the audio tapes to Mr. Brian Todd, Building Industry Association of Kern County. 4. DEFERRED BUSINESS A. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding Transportation Development Fees Public Works Director Raul Rojas explained staff did not have a recommendation for action at this meeting, but wanted to keep the Committee informed and up to date on the next steps in the process. Marian Shaw working in conjunction with County staff has developed very preliminary numbers on the fees. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, February 3, 2003 Page - 2 - Marian Shaw, Public Works Civil Engineer, provided background information. One of the recommendations in the 2010 General Plan was to adopt a fee to take care of developers' impact on the transportation system, The County, City and Kern COG had a report done in 1990 that prepared the framework on how a fee is put together. The City used that framework when Phase One and Phase Two Transportation Impact Fee Schedules were developed. It is based upon the concept that new development pays its way for any new transportation facility that will be needed. Facilities include lanes, bridges, signals and anything needed to get the facility in place, such as right-of-way and earthwork. The General Plan requires the fee to provide facilities for the traveling public. If present trends continue, Bakersfield will have a great deal of growth in the next 20 years. City and County staffs have been reviewing the transportation model With Kern COG and working together over the last several months to develop a preliminary facilities list for "Phase II1." From this point on, staff needs to refine the project totals against Kern COG's traffic model and make the determination the facilities on the list are actually needed to support future development. SeVeral factors make up the equation used to develop the dollar amount for the fees. Set rates are used for single housing and multi-housing per unit. Industrial and commercial are based on a per-trip rate (amount of trips generated by each non- residential classification for commercial and industrial), which is a fair way to distribute the cost for the facilities that will need to be constructed. Once the Facilities List is refined and checked against the Transportation Model, staff will have a level of service fee system. The fee schedule will be taken to the BIA, developers and other groups for their input. It can then be brought to the Urban Development Committee, City Council and Board of Supervisors. An environmental document is required, as well as a nexus document to make sure it meets all the minimum .requirements of the Government Code. Public hearings are also needed. This 'is a metropolitan fee and it is advantageous if it is adopted by the City and the County. Once 'the fee schedule is in place, new large .developments requesting substantial General Plan amendments will be required to pay for a traffic study before the development can be approved. The Committee members had concerns regarding the length of time it takes to develop the fee schedule and requested this be put on the agenda for the joint City and County meeting scheduled for September 2003, if this item is ready to move forward at that time. Staff was requested to put this item back on the .March 3rd Committee meeting agenda. D AFT AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, February 3, 2003 Page - 3 - 5. NEW BUSINESS A. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding side yard setbacks Development Services Director Jack Hardisty provided background information. In November 2002, there was a hearing conceming a request for reduction of side yard setbacks by D. R. Horton, Inc. for work to be done in Riverlakes. The City ordinance requires five feet, and the requested modification was denied by the City Council. The item was referred to the Urban Development Committee for further discussion regarding side yard setbacks of less than five feet. Mr. Brad Boe, D. R. Horton, Inc., spoke in support of allowing encroachments into the side yard setbacks for niches next to the fireplace for television and stereo equipment. Mr. Teddy Bolden, D. R. Horton, Inc., spoke in support of allowing restricted encroachments into the side yard setbacks. Jack Hardisty felt the space is needed between the houses and recommended keeping the current five-foot side yard setback as required by City Ordinance, with the current limited exceptions, such as fireplaces as allow by the ordinance. Public Works Director Raul Rojas suggested if a developer wants to build out niches for televisions, stereo equipment, or book cases, etc., the house should be put on a lot wide enough to allow the extra square feet or build a slightly smaller house to allow for the separation between houses. Committee Chair Couch requested Development Services staff meet with him to discuss this issue further to explore if there is any middle ground where exceptions could be allowed. B. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding CNG Fleet Vehicles Public Works Fleet Superintendent Ernie Medina gave a report on the City's use of CNG and LNG fleet vehicles. At the present time the City has 67 altemate fuel vehicles, 55 ,compressed natural gas (CNG), 5 liquid natural gas (LNG), and 7 electric powered vehicles. Staff has applied and received clean-air grants in the past to offset the extra cost. The differential is approximately, $1,800 for sedans, $2,000 for pickups, $45,000 for refuse trucks; and $35,000 for sweepers. The City has just received a grant for $22,000 from Clean Cities/Department of Energy to help offset the cost of 11 CNG pickups purchased by the City. The use of hybrid vehicles was discussed, which allow for altemate types of fuel. However, at the present time there is not a lot of competition in the hybrid field and DRAFT AGENDA 'SUMMARY REPORT URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, February 3, 2003 Page - 4 - competitive bidding is important when purchasing vehicles. Staff will check with the dealers on their plans for future availability of hybrids. The fueling facility is scheduled for construction mid-February 2003. It will prOVide the ability to fuel CNG and LNG vehicles. The City has received over $1 million from Congestion Mitigation Air Quality through Kern COG toward the construction of the fueling station. This station is built above ground so if there is a need to move to a new location, it can be moved. Committee Member Maggard spoke regarding the importance of using alternate fuels to help with the clean-air solution. Public Works staff was requested to provide additional information on price, maintenance cost and availability of dealers who plan to stock hybrid vehicles and when this will allow for competitive bidding. Public Works Director Raul Rojas stated there is still more that can be done to convert fleet vehicles to alternate fuels; however, usually staff does not move fo;ward unless there are grant monies to offset the extra cost. It was pointed out the City is the largest alternate fuel user in this area. Staff will provide the requested information on hybrid vehicles. C, Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding Committee meeting schedule for 2003 The Committee approved the meeting schedule. 6. COMMITTEE COMMENTS 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 4:47 p.m. Attendance - staff: City Manager Alan Tandy; Assistant City Manager John W. Stinson; City Attorney Bart Thiltgen; Public Works Director Raul Rojas; Development Services Director Jack Hardisty; Assistant Public Works Director Jack LaRochelle; Public Works Operations Manager Brad Underwood; Public Works Fleet Superintendent Ernie Medina; Public Works Civil Engineer Bruce Deeter; Public Works Civil Engineer Marian Shaw; and Principal Planner Jim Eggert, Planning Division. Others: Roger Mclntosh, Mclntosh and Associates; Danielle C. Belton, The Bakersfield Californian; Teddy Bolden,'D.R. Horton, Inc.; and Brad Boe, D. R. Horton, Inc. cc: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers S:~JOHN~Councll Committees\Ufoan Development 200~ud~umma~.~ Residential Care Facilities in the Neighborhood: Federal,. iState, and LOcal Requirem.ems By'Lisa ~ Foster; M.S,~', M.P.A. DECEMBER'!002 ~ Residential Care Facilities in the Neighborhood: Federal, State, and Local Requirements By Lisa K. Foster, M.S.W., M.P.A. ISBN 1-58703-168-X Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................... 1 DIFFERENT POSITIONS ................................................................................................................................................ 1 BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................................................................. LICENSED RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES. ............................................................................................................. FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS. ......................................................................................................................................... STATE REQUIREMENTS AND RESPONSIBILiTIE~ ..................................................................................................... LOCAL REQUIREMENT S AND RESPONSIBILITIES ..................................................................................................... PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES ............................................................................................................................................... 4 COMPLICATED ISSUES, NO EASY RESOLUTIONS .................................................................................................... INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................................... 7 ISSUE ............................................................................................................................................................................. 7 DIFFERENT POSITIONS ................................................................................................................................................ 7 BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................................................................. 8 RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES DESCRIBED ........................................................................................ 11 LICENSING AGENCIES AND TYPES OF FACILITIES ................................................................................................ 11 FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................................................ 15 FAIR HOUSING ACT ................................................................................................................................................... 15 AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT ..................................................................................................................... 16 STATE REQUIREMENTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES ................................................................................. 17 FAiR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING ACT AND OTHER LAWS .............................................................................. 17 LAND USE AND ZONING ........................................................................................................................................... 17 LICENSING AND OVERSIGHT .................................................................................................................................... 18 LOCAL REQUIREMENTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES ................................................................................ 21 POWERS AND LIMITATIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 21 ZONING AND OTHER RESTRICTIONS. ...................................................................................................................... 21 PUBLIC SAFETY ......................................................................................................................................................... 22 PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES ....................................................................................................................................... 23 STATE AND LOCAL RESPONSIBILITIES ................................................................................................................... 23 CARE FACILITIES TASK FORCE ............................................................................................................................... 25 PROPOSITION 36- SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND CRIME PREVENTION ACT ............................................................ 26 COMPLICATED ISSUES, NO EASY RESOLUTIONS .................................................................................................. 26 APPENDIX A- NEWS ARTICLES ON RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES IN NEIGHBORHOODS .................................................................................................................................................. 27 APPENDIX B- STATE LAWS AND REGULATIONS ON RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES ............... 33 APPENDIX C - STATE LAWS RELATED TO SITING OF RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES35 APPENDIX D- RECENT LEGISLATION RELATED TO SITING OF RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES (1997-2002~ ......................................................................................................................................... 37 BIBLIOGRAPHY AND SELECTED RESOURCES ........................................................................................ 41 USEFUL WEBSITES .................................................................................................................................................... 43 NOTES ............................................................................................................................................................................ 45 Acknowledgements The author thanks the many individuals who provided information and helped her understand this issue, especially her contacts at the League of Califomia Cities and at the California Departments of Social Services, Alcohol and Drug Programs, and Health Services. She also thanks Roz Dick and Judy Hust for their editing and other production support on this report. Internet Access This report is also available through the lntemet at the California State Library's home page (www.library.ca. gov) under CRB Reports. Executive Summary During the past decade, local governments have expressed ongoing concems about the impact of federal and state laws on land use decisions affecting residential care facilities (including group homes). It is widely accepted that persons with physical and mental disabilities, and other special needs, deserve to live in the community - in contrast to an institution- and that facilities located in residential neighborhoods allow them to participate in, and become a part of, that community. However, local govemments face concern fi.om homeowners that these residential facilities will have a negative impact on their neighborhoods. The right of individuals with special needs to live in the community versus the right of neighbors to preserve the integhty of their neighborhood results in the longstanding conflict between federal, state, and local government requirements that affect land use regulation. This report identifies these requirements and their impact on the placement of residential care facilities in communities. DIFFERENT POSITIONS Community members generally agree that persons with disabilities and other special needs deserve to live in a community setting like a residential care or treatment facility instead of being isolated and institutionalized. But, it is a common reaction to feel uneasy, concemed, or fearful when a facility moves in next door or down the street. Advocates and facility licensees point out that care and treatment facilities have to be put in someone's neighborhood. They argue that neighbors' fear is largely unfounded; they point to examples of facilities peacefully coexisting with neighbors and studies that conclude that residential care facilities do not have a negative affect on neighborhood safety and property values. In addition, advocates find that neighbors are often uninformed about the facility program and residents, which leads to misconceptions. However, communities do experience problems with facilities. Seventy-two cities responding to a 1999 League of California Cities survey had received one or more complaints ranging fi.om increased Waffic, noise, and other neighborhood disturbances - to code violations - to criminal activities such as assaults and burglaries. The majority of complaints involved facilities that serve youth, individuals with mental illness, and individuals with alcohol or drag addictions. BACKGROUND In 1977, the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Act established the right of Californians with developmental and physical disabilities to receive treatment and live in "the least restrictive environment." This means that, instead of being institutionalized, persons with special needs are entitled to live in normal residential surroundings where they can experience maximum independence and participate in community life while California Research Bureau, California State Library 1 receiving services and care. However, when residential care facihties began opening k~ neighborhoods, the event often triggered community fears. In response, local govemments used land use regulations, especially zoning, to exercise control over where facilities located. Over the years a number of legislative actions have affected this local response. Federal laws were enacted to promote the integration of individuals with disabilities into the community and prohibit discrimin fion against them. Califomia enacted its own laws to prohibit discrimination in housing opportunities. In addition, several court cases clarified how federal and state laws interact with local govemment responsibilities. More recently, the Califomia Senate created a task force in 1997 to analyze and report on the issues relating to facility oversight and placement. And in 2000, Califomia voters approved Proposition 36, the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act. This act diverts thousands of nonviolent drag offenders from prison into community trealment programs, including residential treatment facilities. LICENSED RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES There are over 15,000 licensed residential care facilities throughout the state. Four state agencies are responsible for licensing and overseeing the range of community-based residential facilities. Several types of facilities provide services to diverse populations. Residential care facilities are designed for individuals who require 24-hour supervision but who do not generally need medical care beyond routine health checks and medication monitoring. Residents generally share responsibilities, meals, and recreational activities; they attend schools, work, and use other services in the commumty. The Califomia Department of Social Services licenses group homes and small family homes for children and youtk Group Homes provide supervision and services in a structured environment primarily for children and youth in the foster care system. Small Family Homes provide care in a family setting for six or fewer children with physical and developmental disabilities. In addition, the department licenses facilities for adult and elderly residents who are not able to provide for their own daily needs, have AIDS or HIV, or are recovering from mental illness. The Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs (DAPD) licenses Alcoholism or Drug Abuse Recovery or Treatment Facilities which provide a range of services in a supportive environment for adults who are addicted to alcohol or drags. In addition, the Department of Corrections uses DAPD-licensed facilities to provide community-based drug treatment and recovery services to offenders under the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act. The Department of Health Services licenses communit3~based residential health facilities that provide skilled nursing care on a continuous and intermittent basis. These facilities serve adults and children who are severely developmentally or physically disabled, or are terminally ill. 2 Califomia Research Bureau, Califomia State Library FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS Two federal laws impact local land use practices with respect to residential care facilities. The Fair Housing Act, as amended in 1988, promotes the integration of individuals with disabilities into the community. The broad protections of this act apply to residential care facilities because most residents have disabilities of some kind. In addition, group homes for children are protected under the Act's "familial status" provision. While the Act does not pre-empt local authority over zoning laws, it applies to local govemment entities and prohibits zoning or land use decisions or policies that exclude or otherwise discriminate against individuals with disabilities and other protected classes. The Act also requires that that local govemment make reasonable accommodations in policies and practices when accommodations are necessary to provide equal housing opportunities. The 1990 federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities. The subsequent Supreme Court "Olmstead" decision clahfied that the ADA requires states to place individuals in community settings rather than institutions. STATE REQUIREMENTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES State laws also impact local land use practices with respect to residential care facilities. The Califomia Fair Employment and Housing Act, like the federal FHA, prohibits housing discrimination based on disability and familial status. Other state laws protect residents with disabilities fi.om dischmination in housing, and require that reasonable accommodation or modification of the premises be made for individuals with disabilities. Residential care facilities must have a valid license to operate. The licensing process consists of a background check on the applicant and an on-site facility inspection to ensure that the facility meets health and safety standards. When all health and safety requirements are met, the licensing agency issues a license valid for two years. It conducts a comprehensive facility evaluation on an annual or bi-annual basis. Deficiencies are cited and monetary penalties can be assessed if the facility does not come into compliance with licensing laws and regulations. In addition, the state licensing agency investigates complaints and addresses the concerns of neighbors and other community members. State law requires that residential care facilities that serve six or fewer residents be considered a residential property and be treated the same as a single-family home. This means that local govemment can impose on these facilities only those local use restrictions or fees that apply to other single-family residences. State laws also address overconcentmtion of facilities. Except for residential facilities for the elderly and alcohol and drag facilities, new residential care facilities must be located at least 300 feet fi.om another facility. Local governments can object to requests for placement closer than these limits. Califomia Research Bureau, Califomia State Library 3 LOCAL REQUIREMENTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES Cities and counties have authority to adopt local land use and related regulations, such as zoning and permit requirements. Unlike small facilities, large residential care facilities (those with seven or more residents) are subject to local land use regulations and other restrictions such as special permit requirements (for example, having to obtain a local health department permit for central food service). Local govemments may impose notification and public hearing requirements. However, the requirements must not apply exclusively to residential care facilities, and local govemments must follow state- mandated procedural requirements such as holding hearings, for zoning decisions. Local govemment entities are required to make reasonable accommodations for programs serving individuals with disabilities. In some instances, accommodation may include exceptions to zoning ordinances for large facilities with seven or more residents. Public safety is a major issue related to residential care facilities in the community. Service providers contend that the safety issue is often used as a smokescreen by neighbors and local govemments for taking discriminatory actions that are based on fear. However, some neighbors have experienced problems that impact neighborhood safety (such as assaults, threats and other actions by facility residents as described in the League of Califomia Cities survey). When public safety issues occur, federal and state laws do not pre-empt local authority or responsibility to deal with it. Local rules that are enacted and enforced to provide for the community's safety are not prohibited under federal or state law as long as they are applied to all community members and groups. t"Elected PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES officials and neighbors have a duty to welcome group homes and The overarching public policy issue continues to be that of other community residences, balancing the rights of individuals with special needs to live and and to educate themselves and participate in the community with the rights of the commurdties their colleagues about the need for such housing options, and and individuals to protect the welfare of their families and the requirements of the FHA neighborhoods. This issue sometimes plays out as a conflict and the ADA, just as providers between state (and federal) requirements to protect individuals and residents have a duty to be fi:om discrimination and local govemments' right and good neighbors and to respond responsibility to exercise control over its communities. to breaches of that duty with corrective action." The League of California Cities and a coalition of advocates for League of California Cities, 2002community care residents suggest that three issues need to be ~: ~:~_~:~.~,~ ~,~:~,~ addressed to reconcile residential care facilities and community concerns. The first is a comprehensive plan to be used as a tool to address community needs while integrating residential care facilities into neighborhoods. The second is uniform standards and universal licensing of facilities for children and youth to protect residents and the community. The third issue is adequate and affordable housing for residential care facilities. A related policy issue is an equitable disthbution of facilities among communities. Neighborhoods with densely clustered facilities do not provide a "normal" community 4 California Research Bureau, California State Library environment for residents; they also change in character. Currently, however, care facilities are not evenly distributed among neighborhoods; they are overwhelmingly located in moderate- and low-income neighborhoods. Neighborhoods with several facilities want other communities to take their "fair share." The Senate Concurrent Resolution 27 Care Facilities Task Force analyzed the issues relating to facility oversight and siting. While task force members - local government representatives, service providers, and fair housing advocates - agreed on the need for reform, they disagreed on specific solutions such as limiting facilities. The task force concluded that a long-range approach that promoted quality residential care and a wider dispersal of residential care facilities would be most helpful in addressing the range of concems. Subsequent legislation and state administrative actions addressed many of the specific recommendations; legislation that would have implemented other recommendations was vetoed, primarily for fiscal reasons. Proposition 36, the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000 (SACPA), brought new attention to the siting issue. Prior to its passage, local govemments expressed concem about the proliferation of new recovery or treatment facilities that would be established to meet the demand created by the new act. In addition, fears were heightened because the residents would be convicted drag offenders. There has been a 17% increase in residential treatment capacity as a result of SACPA. Much of this increase is from expanding facilities that are already established in neighborhoods. The Depamnent of Alcohol and Drug Programs reports that cooperation between state and local govemment entities has been positive. However, some communities are experiencing conflicts between neighbors and facihties. For example, neighbors oppose expanding facilities, and advocates point to long waiting lists for treatment that result from this opposition. COMPLICATED ISSUES, NO EASY RESOLUTIONS In conclusion, there are no easy resolutions to the complicated ongoing issues around siting residential care facilities in the community. Some goals conflict, like local control and federal/state protections. In addition some "quality" issues are hard to legislate. For example, what are the best strategies for making marginal licensed facilities (those that generate the greatest number of concems and complaints) into quality facilities and good neighbors? A related issue concerns both quality and capacity. Should marginal facilities be tolerated in areas where there are not enough quality facilities to meet the demand? Resolutions that address and balance the needs of neighbors, the needs of residents needing services, and the needs of local government are difficult to identify and achieve. California Research Bureau, Califomia State Library 5 Introduction ISSUE During the past decade, local govemments have expressed ongoing concems about the impact of federal and state law on zoning and land use decisions affecting group homes and other residential care facilities. Facilities that are located in residential neighborhoods play an important role in integrating individuals into the mainstream community. Living in the community - in conlrast to institutional living - allows individuals with special needs such as physical, developmental, and mental disabilities to live as normally as possible. However, when facilities locate in residential neighborhoods, some homeowners and neighbors become concemed that the facility will pose a safety or other negative impact, and angry with local govemment that their concems are not being adequately addressed. Balancing the fights of individuals with special needs to live in the community and the rights of neighbors to preserve the integrity of their neighborhood result in a longstanding conflict between federal, state, and local government requirements that impact land use regulation,l It is often unclear to community residents, and others, what requirements apply to facility siting,* and how federal and state requirements affect local govemment's ability to address a local land use issue. This report identifies the federal and state laws and regulations, and the local laws and ordinances, that impact the siting of group homes and other residential care facilities in neighborhoods and communities. It delineates the responsibilities and requirements of the three governmental levels, and identifies policy issues. (For purposes of this report, the term "residential care facilities" includes group homes.) DIFFERENT POSITIONS By and large, community members agree that persons with disabilities and other special needs deserve to live in a community setting like a residential care or treatment facility instead of being isolated and institutionalized. But, it is a common reaction to feel uneasy, concerned, or fearful when a facility moves in NIMBY is an acronym next door or down the street. A recent news article headline sums up a for "Not in My fi'equent neighborhood position: "Treatment centers are great, but put Backyard," a phrase that this one elsewhere? (See Appendix A for some newspape~ accounts is used in this context to of recent conflicts between neighbors and residential care facilities.) describe resistance from individuals and groups to having residential Advocates and facility licensees point out that care and treatment care facilities located in facilities have to be put in someone's neighborhood. They argue that their neighborhoods. "nimbyism" is based on fear that is largely unfounded. They point to existing facilities that have become accepted and valued neighbors, * Siting refers to the process of determining a location and starting operation of a residential facility. Califomia Research Bureau, California State Library 7 and studies that conclude that residential care facilities do not have a negative affeCt on neighborhoods in terms of safety and property values.3 In addition, advocates find that community members are oRen uninformed about the population that will be served and why they are there. This leads to misconceptions about the residents and the risks posed by the facility. However, communities do experience problems with facilities. The League of California Cities surveyed over 450 cities in 1999 to identify the number and types of complaints they had received about residential care facilities. Seventy-two cities responded; they identified one or more complaints ranging from increased traffic, noise, and other neighborhood disturbances to code violations. Some cities also reported receiving complaints about criminal activities such as assaults and burglaries. Facilities that serve youth, individuals with mental illness, and individuals with alcohol or drag addictions were identified as the source of the majority of complaints.4 BACKGROUND Prior to the 1970s, persons with physical, developmental, and mental disabilities who were not cared for by family members were cared for in large institutions like state hospitals and training centers. During the 1970s and 1980s, Califomia and other states recognized that these institutions had become "warehouses" that segregated children and adults with special needs fi.om their communities. There were horror stories about the treatment of many residents. In addition, a large number of individuals did not need the extremely costly level of care provided in an institution. Instead, they could more effectively leam life skills and function, with services and support, in a family-like environment within the commumty. in 1977, the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act estabhshed the right of individuals with developmental disabilities to receive treatment and live in "the least restrictive environment.''5 This means that persons with special needs are entitled to live in normal residential surroundings where they can experience maximum independence and participate in community life while receiving services and care. The Act reflected the general agreement that persons with special needs should be a part of the community. However, the transition from institutional to community care was not a smooth one. Siting new facilities in neighborhoods triggered community fears about living close to a home with several individuals who had disabilities. It raised concerns about safety, crime, and impact on the neighborhood character and property values. In response to community concerns, many local governments used land use regulations, especially zoning, to exercise control over where facilities located. Advocates charged that local governments were reacting to community NIMBYism and supporting neighbors at the expense of their citizens with disabilities. Beginning in the late 1980s, Congress amended the federal Fair Housing Act to promote the integration of individuals with disabilities into the community. It also enacted the American with Disabilities Act to prohibit discrimination against individuals with disabihties. In Califomia, the legislature enacted the Fair Housing and Employment Act 8 Califomia Research Bureau, Califomia State Library to prohibit discrimination in housing opportnnities. These federal and state laws impact local land use decisions and requirements. There have been several court cases and legislative efforts over the years to clahfy federal and state law. However, questions and different interpretations by resident and neighborhood advocates continue. In 1997, The Califomia Senate passed a concurrent resolution (SCR 27) in response to an increased number of complaints about the proliferation of group homes and residential facihties. SCR 27 established a task force to analyze and report on the issues relating to facility oversight and siting. 6 In 2000, Califomia voters approved Proposition 36, the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act (SACPA). Effective July 2001, this act significantly changed the state's criminal justice and drug treatment systems by diverting thousands of nonviolent drag offenders fi.om prison into community treatment, including residential treatment facilities. Prior to its passage, concerns about the impact of more facilities on neighborhoods were raised by local govemment organizations. California Research Bureau, Califomia State Library 9 10 Califomia Research Bureau, Califomia State Library Residential Care Facilities Described Four state agencies license and oversee more than 15,000 residential care facilities throughout the state. These include several types of facilities that provide services to diverse populations. The facilities vary in size and capacity: fi.om one to more than 100 residents. Small facilities are generally defined as six or fewer beds; large facilities have seven or more beds. In some small facilities, the licensee provides care in his or her own home; in most facilities, paid staff provide care on a live-in or shift basis. Residential care facilities are designed for individuals who require 24-hour supervision but who do not generally need medical care beyond routine health checks and medication monitoring. Some people live in residential facilities because they require this level of support, others because they do not have the resources to allow them to live independently (such as funds for personal care attendants.) These facilities provide residents the opportunity to be a part of the community and participate in community life. Residents share responsibilities, meals, and recreational activities; they attend schools, work, and use other services in the community. (See table on page 11 for numbers and capacity.) LICENSING AGENCIES AND TYPES OF FACILITIES Department of Social Services The California Department of Social Services (DSS) Community Care Licensing Division licenses a range of community-based residential facilities for adults and children. Group Homes are both small and large facilities that provide supervision and services in a structured environment primarily for children and youth in the foster care system.7 Children who have been removed fi.om home due to parental neglect or abuse are placed in group homes when they need more intensive treatment services than are available in a foster family home. In addition, lower risk juvenile offenders who can benefit fi.om treatment receive probation and are placed in group homes as a low-end sentencing option or an altemative to juvenile detention facilities. "... They [children with Group homes also serve children who are not in the foster care disabilities] learn how to live system. Some children in group homes have serious as a family. The group home developmental or emotional disabilities. Others are participating fosters the very same family in alcohol and drag treatment or other programs. Children with values our most exclusive residential zoning districts less severe physical and developmental disabilities are placed in advance." Small Family Homes. American Planning The DSS also licenses facilities (commonly known as "board and Association, 1997 care homes") for adult residents who are not able to provide for ~:..~_~~,~.:_,~.~~,.~~ their own daily needs. Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly make up the greatest number of community care homes, followed by Adult Residential Facilities. In addition, California Research Bureau, California State Library 11 Social Rehabilitation Facilities provide care for adults recovering from mental illness, and Residential Care Facilities for the Chronically Ill serve adults who have Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or the Human Immunodeficiency Vires (H1V)fi Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs SOBER LIVING HOMES The state Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs Sober Living Homes are alcohol- and (DAPD) Licensing and Certification Branch licenses drug-free residences that allow residents to live in a supportive environment. Alcoholism or Drug Abuse Recovery or Treatment Although residents generally receive Facilities. These facilities provide recovery or services from a licensed recovery or treatment services in a supportive environment for treatment program, Sober Living Homes adults who are addicted to alcohol or drags. Services are cooperative living arrangements, not include detoxificahon, group and individual sessions, residential care facilities. They are not education, and recovery planning.9 required (or eligible) to be licensed, and are not subject to Department of Alcohol and Drug Program oversight and The state Department of Corrections uses DAPD- regulatory requirements, licensed facilities to provide community-based drug Residents of Sober Living Homes must treatment and recovery services to offenders under the comply with state landlord/tenant and SACPA. (The Department of Corrections does not eviction laws and all local ordinances that license residential facilities.) The offender population apply to other similar residences, in community facilities includes inmate mothers and DAPD Fact Sheet their young children, and homeless parolees who need multiple services. Department of Health Services The State Department of Health Services (DHS) Licensing and Certification Division licenses four types of community- based residential health facilities. These facilities provide skilled nursing care on a continuous and/or intermittent basis. Congregate Living Health Facilities are small facilities that provide care to individuals who are severely physically or developmentally disabled, or terminally ill. Intermediate Care Facilities for the Developmentally Disabled provide personal care, training, and supportive services to adults and children in large facilities; Intermediate Care Facilities for the Developmentally Disabled - Habilitative serve the same population in smaller facilities. Intermediate Care Facilities for the Developmentally Disabled- Nursing serve medically fiagile adults and children in both small and large facilities. Medically fiagile individuals are medically stable but have conditions (such as a feeding tube) that require special care, supplies, or equipment, t 0 12 California Research Bureau, Califomia State Library Type Licensing Total Total Total Capacity Entity Number Number <6 Group Home DSS 1,660 1,353 16,602 Small Family Homes DSS 386 386 1,756 Adult Residential Facility DSS 4,761 4,052 39,419 Social Rehabilitation Facility DSS 71 4 920 Residential Care Facility/Elderly DSS 6,227 4,703 148,530 Residential Care Facility/Chronically IH DSS 28 11 406 Alcohol & Drug Abuse Recovery/Treatment DAPD 803 325 19,636 Facility Congregate Living Health Facility DHS 9 9 705 Intermediate Care Not Facility/DD DHS 13 Available 1,019 Intermediate Care Not DHS 780 4,854 Facility/DD- Habilitative Available Intermediate Care Not DHS 307 1,877 Facility/DD- Nursing Available TOTAL 15,045 10,843 235,724 Sources: DSS (9/15/02), D,4PD (9/30/02); and DHS (8/26/02) Califomia Research Bureau, California State Library 13 14 Califomia Research Bureau, Califomia State Library Federal Requirements FAIR HOUSING ACT The broad protections of the federal Fair Housing THE FAIR HOUSING ACT Act (FHA), as amended in 1988, apply to nearly every type of housing, including residential care The Fair Housing Act (FHA) is included in facilities. The Act prohibits discrimination on the Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act, enacted by Congress in 1968. The FHA addresses state basis of specified characteristics in sale, rental, and federal housing barriers and segregation by zoning, land use restriction, and other ndes.~ ~ prohibiting housing discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin. The Act does not pre-empt local authority over In 1988, Congress passed the Fair Housing zoning laws. However, it applies to local Amendments Act (Public Law 100-430) to govemment entities and prohibits them fi'om strengthen its enforcement provisions. It added making zoning or land use decisions or "handicap" (disability) and "familial status" to the list of protected classes under the FHA. implementing land use policies that exclude or otherwise discriminate against protected classes, The definition of disability under the Act such as individuals with disabilities (or people includes mental illness, developmental disabilities, physical impairments, persons with associated with such individuals, like families). AIDS or HIV, and persons recovering from addiction who are not currently using illegal Residential care facilities are generally covered drugs. under the FHA as most residents have disabilities of The FHA does not cover individuals who are some kind. In addition, court cases have found that currently using, or have been convicted for the group homes for children are protected under the manufacture and distribution of, illegal drugs. Act's "familial status" provision that addresses In addition, the FHA protections do not apply discrimination against children under age 18 in the to individuals with disabilities if there is recent, credible evidence that his or her conduct household. "would constitute a direct threat to the health or safety of other individuals... [or will cause] There has been a significant amount of litigation to substantial physical damage to the property of interpret and clarify FHA protections. In addition, others." the United States Department of Justice and the Department of Housing and Urban Development issued a joint statement in 1999 on the impact of the FHA on group homes and local land use.~2 The Joint Statement clarifies that the FHA makes it tmlawfi~ to: · Use land use policies or take action that treats groups of individuals with disabilities less favorably than other groups. ·Take action against, or deny, a permit for a home because of the disability of individuals who live or would live there. · Refuse to make reasonable accommodations in land use and zoning policies and procedures where such accommodation may be necessary to afford individuals or groups with disabilities an equal opportunity to "use and enjoy housing." Califomia Research Bureau, California State Library 15 Reasonable Accommodation The FHA requires that local govemments make reasonable accommodations in "rules, policies, practices, or services," when accommodations are necessary to provide equal housing oppommities. The reasonable accommodations requirement applies to zoning ordinances and other land use regulations and practices. The accommodation should be the least drastic measure necessary to achieve its purpose. For example, a care facility that serves children or adults with physical disabilities could request that ramps, wide doorways, and other building renovations be allowed to accommodate residents in wheelchairs. A reasonable accommodation is determined on a case-by-case basis. Local governments can deny a request for reasonable accommodation if it would "fundamentally alter the nature of the ordinance, neighborhood, or local zoning procedures; undermine the legitimate purposes and effects of existing zoning regulations; or impose undue financial and administrative burdens on the municipahty.''13 AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT Title II of the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) The federal Americans with covers all state and local government activities, regardless Disabilities Act prohibits of the govemment entity's size. It also applies whether or discrimination against qualified not the local govemment is receiving federal funds? individuals with disabilities in all programs, activities, and services of public entities. It guarantees equal Olmstead Decision opportunity for individuals with disabilities in public accommodations, In 1999, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision employment, transportation, state and on the impact of the ADA on community care. The local government services, and telecommunications. "Olmstead" decision clarified that the ADA requires states to place persons with disabilities in commtmity settings An individual with a disability is defined as a person who has a rather than institutions when three conditions are met: 1) physical or mental impairment that treatment professionals have determined that community substantially limits one or more major placement is appropriate; 2) the individual does not object life activities, or a person who is to community placement; and 3) the placement can be perceived by others as having such an reasonably accommodated, taking into account the impairment. resources available to the state and the need of others with disabilities. ~ ~ 16 Califomia ResearCh Bureau, California State Library State Requirements and Responsibilities FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING ACT AND OTHER LAWS Like the FHA, the Califomia Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) prohibits housing discrimination based on disability, familial status, and other protected factors. Under FEHA, discriminatory practices include treating individuals or groups in protected classes differently than others, or imposing different requirements. In addition, state law under the Unmh Civil Rights Act, the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act, and the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act protects individuals with mental, developmental, or physical disabilities from discrimination in the provision of housing. Disability rights sections in the Civil Code prohibit discrimination and require reasonable accommodation or modification of the building to enable residents with disabilities to have equal access and "full enjoyment of the premises."~ 6 LAND USE AND ZONING Small Facilities Treated Like Single-Family Homes State law requires that residential care facilities that serve six or fewer residents be considered a residential property. ("Six or fewer persons" generally refers to the number of residents and does not include facility operators and staff.) These facilities must be treated the same as a single-family home. As a result, small residential care facilities are exempt from all local land use and zoning restrictions, taxes, or fees that do not apply to single- family homes. In addition, small facilities are not required to notify local authorities or neighbors of their intent to move into the neighborhood or of their presence.17 (See Appendix C for relevant statutes.) Overconcentration of Facilities State law requires that new health and community care facilities - group homes, small family homes, adult residential care, and social rehabilitation facilities - be sited at least 300 feet from another residential health or community care facility. Congregate living health facilities are to be sited at least 1,000 feet from any other facility. Residential care facilities for the elderly and alcoholism or drag abuse recovery or treatment facilities are excluded l~om overconcentmtion provisions. (See Appendix C for relevant statutes.) Local govemment can request that an application for licensure be denied on the basis of overconcentration. Prior to approving a hcense, the licensing agency must notify them about the new facility's location to allow them the oppommity to object or dispute the overconcentration determination. (The Department of Social Services, for example, sends a form to the local govemment entity that states whether the proposed facility would result in overconcentration. If the local govemment entity does not object, the license is granted.) California Research Bureau, Califomia State Library 17 LICENSING AND OVERSIGHT~8 LICENSING AGENCY RESPONSIBILITIES Residential care facilities are required by state law to have a Approve/deny license valid license to operate. State licensing agencies are responsible applications for overseeing residential care facilities and ensuring that they Enforce licensing laws and are in compliance with health and safety laws and regulations. regulations (Licensing does not regulate facilities' treatment programs.) In Maintain public files on addition, the licensing agency provides public information about licensed facilities specific facilities, such as licensing status, complaints lodged against them, and pending investigations. (See Appendix B for Investigate complaints relevant statutes and regulations.) Revoke licenses and impose fines when necessary The Licensing Process The licensing process is essentially the same among state licensing agencies. An orientation for potential applicants covers licensing requirements and the licensee's responsibilities. It includes issues such as determining a location, informing neighbors, and addressing neighborhood expectations and concerns. The formal approval process begins when the licensing agency receives a completed application and fee payment. (With some exceptions, there is a licensing fee for residential care facilities.) The licensing agency completes a background check on the applicant and a facility inspection. It determines the facility capacity based on space and any fire clearance conditions. When all requirements are met, the licensing agency issues a license valid for two years, unless it is extended. (Group homes are initially issued a provisional license; after 12 months they receive a permanent license if they have complied with licensing laws and regulations.) The licensing agency conducts a comprehensive evaluation to ensure that all residential facilities remain in compliance with laws and regulations. (The Department of Social Services conducts annual evaluation visits; the Department of Alcohol and Drag Programs visits at least once every two years.) Prior to the visit, the licensing entity reviews the facility file. It may contact local law enforcement and neighbors if there has been a complaint, or if the facility has a history of problems. In addition, the licensing agency follows up on neighborhood issues that have surfaced. The licensing agency inspects the physical plant; reviews administrative, personnel, and resident files; and interviews staff and residents. It also reviews the staffing milos and staff qualifications, and how the facility addresses neighborhood complaints. When deficiencies are found, the licensing agency gives a written notice to the licensee and verifies in a follow-up visit that the corrections were made. If the deficiencies are not corrected, the licensing agency issues civil penalties; it can ultimately revoke the facility's license if the licensee does not comply with requirements. 18 Califomia Research Bureau, Califomia State Library Staffing and Facility Maintenance Most complaints about residential facilities stem from lack of supervision. Inadequate staffing and supervision of facility residents can directly affect the safety of both the residents and the neighborhood. In addition, property maintenance issues create friction. A m-down facility in need of repair may create safety concerns. In addition, its condition reflects not only on the facility but on the neighborhood's appearance. Licensing regulations require that at least one qualified staff person be with the residents and/or on the premises at all times. The minimum number of direct care staff required to be present is based on the number of residents. All staffmust be at least 18 years of age, free of communicable disease, and have a medical clearance and first aid certification. In addition, staffmust undergo a criminal record clearance (and a child abuse check to work in a small family home or group home). Staff must also receive appropriate training. In addition, licensing regulations require that residential care facilities be "clean, safe, sanitary and in good repair at all times for the safety and well-being of residents, employees, and visitors." For example, licensees must keep doorways, porches and walkways free of obstruction. Resident Information and Confidentiality Federal regulations and state laws require that facility licensee and staff respect and protect the residents' right to privacy and confidentiality. In addition, access to information about children in group homes is restricted to staff, the licensing agency, and the child's authorized representative unless a juvenile court judge issues a court order allowing access to other designated individuals? 9 The Complaint Process GOOD NEIGHBOR The state licensing agency is responsible for addressing the GUIDELINES complaints and concems of neighbors and other community The Department of Social members. The complainant's identity can be kept confidential. Services and the Department of If requested, the licensing agency will notify the complainant Alcohol and Drug Programs have of the outcome after investigating the complaint, each published "good neighbor" guidelines for group homes and alcohol and drug treatment Neighborhood Complaint Procedures facilities. These resource guides address neighborhood concerns "Group homes successfully serving children with the same needs about safety, client and staff often fare very differently in their relationships with neighbors and conduct, and poor maintenance. the community in general. Sometimes this is because of local They include strategies for circumstances beyond the control of the licensee. More often, establishing and maintaining however, this is because of differences in approach to local positive relationships with communication. Public relations are important?' 20 neighbors and the community. State law requires that group homes with six or fewer residents have written neighborhood complaint procedures that include a method of immediate response to complaints and incidents. The group home's licensee (or designated person) Califomia Research Bureau, California State Library 19 must investigate and respond to the person making the complaint or reporting the incident. In addition, the licensee must be available at a specific time each week to meet residents and learn of neighborhood problems? 20 Califomia Research Bureau, Califomia State Library Local Requirements and Responsibilities POWERS AND LIMITATIONS The Califomia Constitution gives local governments authority to enact and implement local planning and land use regulations to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. They have the right to adopt and enforce planning and land use requirements with one caveat: local ordinances do not conflict with federal and state laws. As a result, federal and state laws that prohibit discrimination related to housing (such as the FHA, ADA, and FEHA) impact the authority of local govermnents in this area. ZONING AND OTHER RESTRICTIONS Each local govemment entity is required to adopt a general plan that includes a land use element. The primary means of implementing general plan goals is through zoning ordinances. Zoning is based on the concept of separating land uses according to their impact? Local ordinances identify use zones (such as residential and commercial), the land uses permitted on a given site, and the standards for each zone's permitted use. Local governments also issue conditional (special) use permits to allow facilities that are considered essential or desirable to locate in a zoning district restricted to different uses. Differences Between Small and Large Facilities As stated in the previous section, small facilities (those that WHERE TO GO WITH COMPLAINTS/CONCERNS house six or fewer residents) are considered to be a residential use of property. They must be treated the same as single- Small Facilities (six or fewer) family residences, are treated by state law as residential properties; they have the same restrictions as other In contrast, residential care facilities with seven or more single family residences. residents are not considered residential property. These large The state licensing agency is facilities are subject to local land use, zoning ordinances, and responsible for addressing other restrictions such as special permit requirements (for concerns and complaints about example, having to obtain a local health department permit for the facility, staff, and residents. central food service). Large Facilities (seven or more) are subject to local requirements Reasonable Accommodation and restrictions. These generally include advance notice and a public hearing process. Local govemment entities are required to make reasonable accommodations for programs serving individuals with The county or city is responsible disabilities. In some instances, accommodation may include for addressing concerns and complaints about local exceptions to zoning or other ordinances for care facilities. For requirements and processes. example, in some communities, alcohol and drug facilities located in residential neighborhoods have received approval The state licensing agency is responsible for addressing fi.om local government to increase the number of residents in concerns and complaints about existing facilities in order to reasonably accommodate the need the facility, staff, and residents. to serve additional individuals. California Research Bureau, Califomia State Library 21 Public Notification and Hearings Like other individual residential properties, small facilities are not required to provide notice that they are moving into a neighborhood or commumty. In addition, their decision about where to locate the facility is not subject to a public hearing process. In contrast, local govemments may impose notification and public heating requirements on large facilities for seven or more residents. However, local gove'mments may not establish requirements that apply exclusively to residential care facilities as this would be a violation of the FHA? In addition, local govemments must follow state-mandated procedural requirements such as holding heatings for zoning decisions. PUBLIC SAFETY Safe neighborhoods are a critical concem to local govemments, neighbors and other community members. Facility licensees, staff, and residents share this concem. Facility licensees, advocates, and service providers contend that the safety issue is often used as a smokescreen by neighbors and local govemments for taking actions that are discriminatory and based on reasons other than safety. In their view, the common perception that care facility residents will cause problems is generally based on fear, not facts. However, some neighbors and local governments have experienced problems that impact neighborhood safety (such as assaults, threats, and other actions by facility residents as described in the League of California Cities survey). Federal and state laws do not pre- empt local authority or responsibility to deal with public safety issues when they occur. Local roles that are enacted and enforced to provide for the community's safety are not prohibited under federal or state law as long as they are applied to all community members and groups. In addition, persons with or without disabilities who present a direct threat to the persons or property of others are not protected under anti-discrimination laws. 24 22 Califomia Research Bureau, Califomia State Library Public Policy Issues STATE AND LOCAL RESPONSIBILITIES The overarching public policy issue continues to be that of STATE OF CALIFORNIA balancing the rights of individuals with special needs to live POLICY ON RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES and participate in the community with the rights of the individuals to protect the welfare of their families and their "The Legislature hereby declares neighborhoods, that it is the policy of this state that each county and city shall permit and encourage the development of This issue often plays out as a conflict between state (and sufficient numbers and types of federal) requirements to protect individuals fi.om residential care facilities as are discrimination and local governments' right and commensurate with local need." responsibility to exercise control over its communities. At (Welfare and Institutions Code) other times, the conflict remains largely at the local level. Similar intent language exists for While ensuring that all citizens are protected fi.om facilities serving persons with discrimination, local govemments must be semitive to the mental illness, persons addicted to alcohol or drugs, persons with life- needs of their citizens who reside in care facilities and be threatening illness, persons with responsive to the concems of individuals who live in and. developmental disabilities and the wish to preserve the character of their neighborhoods and elderly. communities. Reconciling Residential Care Facilities and Community Concerns LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES The National League of Cities and the Coalition to Preserve POLICY ON RESIDENTIAL the Fair Housing Act (a coalition of numerous advocacy CARE FACILITIES groups) have been working together on balancing rights and "The League supports permitting concerns. In 1999, they published a joint document that cities to exercise review and land describes their differing positions and areas of consensus., use regulation of group home They identify three issues that need to be addressed in facilities and residential care reaching a consensus on siting residential facilities for facilities in residential neighborhoods including the individuals with disabilities and facilities for children. These application of zoning, building and issues also pertain to other community residential care safety standards. State and county facilities? licensing agencies should be required to confer with the city's Comprehensive Plan to Balance Needs planning agency in determining whether to grant a license to a community care facility. The The first issue is the need for a state or local comprehensive League recognizes that better plan that is developed in consultation with community review and regulation of residential stakeholders and used as a tool for balancing needs and care facilities will protect both the providing for the welfare of all citizens on a long-range community surrounding a facility and the residents within a facility basis. The plan will provide a guideline for establishing from a poorly managed facility or ordinances that take into account community needs while the absence of state oversight." integrating residential care facilities into neighborhoods throughout the community. California Research Bureau, Califomia State Library 23 Uniform Standards and Universal Licensing The second issue is the need for uniform standards and universal licensing of facilities for children and youth. State licensing agencies must provide adequate oversight to ensure that licensing requirements are strictly enforced to provide appropriate supervision and support of residents and protect the surrounding community. (Similarly, the need for mandated licensure for Sober Living Homes, or an altemative means of oversight, has been an issue for several years. The need for oversight is based on the same premise: consistent standards would protect and benefit both the residents and the community. Cities responding to the League of Califomia Cities survey reported that Sober Living Homes were responsible for a large number of complaints. To date, however, legislative efforts to regulate them have failed.) Adequate and Affordable Housing The third issue is the need for adequate and affordable housing. Housing is necessary for children and adults with special needs to live in the community. The lack of adequate housing is a key problem facing individuals who need to live in residential care. Responsibility for addressing the housing problem cannot be limited to a specific community or jurisdiction. Instead, broad regional approaches - using collaborative planning processes that have adequate resources - must be implemented. Fair Share Among Neighborhoods A related policy issue is the equitable distribution of facilities among communities. In order for children and individuals with special needs to live as normal a life as possible, facilities should be located in a residential neighborhood. In addition, facility residents should be able to remain in their own communities, close to their families. To accomplish both goals, facilities should be scattered throughout residential districts rather than be concentrated in any single neighborhood or community. Neighborhood associations and many advocates for individuals with special needs agree that a neighborhood composed primarily of residential care facilities would adversely impact the neighborhood and all its residents, including facility residents. Facilities that are so densely clustered - overconcentrated - as to recreate an institutional environment defeat the purpose of community-based care.26 Currently, residential care facilities are not evenly distributed among neighborhoods (or counties). Facilities are overwhelmingly located in moderate- and low-income neighborhoods. Many are concentrated in rural areas and counties. As a result, many of these communities feel they are being unfairly targeted. They charge that other neighborhoods and communities are successfully avoiding their "fair share" of residential care facilities and call for a more even distribution. Housing costs are generally identified as the major factor in location decisions. Facilities also cite accessibility to services for the target population as a reason for locating in 24 California Research Bureau, Califomia State Library specific areas. However, because there is generally no documentation of need for residential care facilities in specific communities, it is not known whether clusters of facilities represent over-concentration or instead reflect an appropriate response to the needs within that community.27 CARE FACILITIES TASK FORCE28 In 1998, the SCR 27 Care Facilities Task Force - comprised of local government representatives, social service providers, and fair housing advocates - analyzed the issues relating to facility oversight and siting to recommend needed changes in state law. While members agreed on the need for reform, they disagreed on what direction such reform should take. Local officials supported legislative action that would allow greater local involvement (such as increasing the required distance between facilities, placing moratoriums on new facilities, and other measures that would limit facility expansions and prevent new facilities in communities that already had several facilities). In contrast, service providers who had experienced neighborhood resistance and proponents of fair housing opposed such action and stressed the importance of retaining existing state and federal fair housing protections and equal opportunities for facility residents. Fair housing advocates timber maintained that existing laws allow persons with disabilities the right to choose where to live regardless of the number of persons with disabilities in a particular community, and that spacing and density restrictions violate these laws. The task force concluded that that there were no quick solutions to the complicated issues and concerns. Instead, they presented long-range recommendations that would promote quality residential care and a wider dispersal of residential care facilities. The task force recommended establishing pilot programs to try out new approaches, and implementing statewide mechanisms to enhance quality of services while preserving neighborhoods. It recognized that there would be costs associated with implementing these recommendations. Legislation to implement the Task Force recommendations was contained in several bills~ Some were vetoed or died in committee; however, over half of the recommendations were implemented through legislation or were administratively addressed. For example, legislation created a pilot project to encourage group homes to work with neighborhood residents to resolve issues. The pilot sites experienced a significant reduction in complaints. This reduction was attributed to ongoing communication and coordination among the licensing agency, local law enforcement, and other local government entities. Based on this experience, in 1999 the Department of Social Services directed all licensing offices to establish local task forces if requested by the commtlnity.29 A 1999 group home reform bill included a number of facihty management and operations improvements for group homes. It required a neighbor complaint process to respond to neighbors' concems, a provisional license process to more easily revoke the license if needed, financial audits, community advisory boards, staff training, and an expedited fingerprint process. In addition, "Good Neighbor" guidebooks were developed and Califomia Research Bureau, Califomia State Library 25 distributed to group homes and alcohol and drag facilities. (See Appendix D for a description of bills related to facility siting.) PROPOSITION 36 - SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND CRIME PREVENTION ACT The Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act (SACPA) brought new attention to the siting issue. Effective January 2001, non-violent adult offenders charged with simple drag possession or drag use offenses complete treatment in the commtmity instead of a jail or prison tenn.3° Prior to its passage, local governments expressed concern about the proliferation of new recovery or treatment facilities that would be established to meet the demand created by the new act. in addition, fears were heightened because the residents would be convicted drag offenders. The Department of Alcohol and Drag Abuse Prevention reports that the treatment capacity across the state has expanded significantly as a result of SACPA (including a 17% increase in licensed residential programs).3~ Much of the increase in community treatment/recovery beds is fi.om expanding facilities that are already established in neighborhoods, not fi.om new facilities. And, the "new" drag offender population generally consists of the same persons who have previously been in established facilities - they are just entering treatment programs via a new mechanism. The Department repons that cooperation among state and local govemment entities in implementing SACPA has been positive. However, some communities are experiencing conflicts between neighbors and facilities. For example, some neighbors oppose expanding facilities, and advocates point to long waiting lists for treatment that result fi.om this opposition. 32 COMPLICATED ISSUES, NO EASY RESOLUTIONS In conclusion, there are no easy resolutions to the complicated ongoing issues around siting residential care facilities in the community. Some goals conflict, like local control and federal/state protections. In addition some "quality" issues are hard to legislate. For example, what are the best strategies for making marginal licensed facilities (those that generate the greatest number of concerns and complaints) into quality facilities and good neighbors? A related issue concerns both quality and capacity. Should marginal facilities be tolerated in areas where there are not enough quality facilities to meet the demand? Resolutions that address and balance the needs of neighbors, the needs of residents needing services, and the needs of local govemment are difficult to identify and achieve. 26 California Research Bureau, Califomia State Library Appendix A- News Articles on Residential Care Facilities in Neighborhoods [See next page] Califomia Research Bureau, California State Library 27 GROUP HOMES: BI'G NEED, BI'G FEARS By MAREVA BROWN, Bee Staff Writer Teen Sex offenders need help--where to house them can be toughest part. Inside a dark-brown, four-bedroom house in the Sacramento region live six young teenagers who are learning not to be the rapists and child molesters of tomorrow. The boys, most of them 13 and 14 years old and victims of molestation themselves, have been placed in this group home because, despite their sex offenses, probation officers believe they will benefit from intensive therapy and do not pose a significant threat to society. Staff members take precautions: Youths are bused to a private school so they won't mix With other children. They don't go outside without an adult escort, and they aren't allowed to play basketball in the street like the other neighborhood kids. But the appearance of this and five other similar group homes on quiet residential streets in a neighborhood near Sacramento over the past decade have been enough to prompt some neighbors to sell their homes. Last month, similar unrest broke out in Elk Grove, where a newly opened group home for youthful sex offenders is being opposed in a highly publicized battle. The city has sued the state, saying it wasn't notified about the home, and wants the state to remove it. However, behavioral experts say group homes are the best - and perhaps last - chance to stop young sexual offenders from developing into hard-core predators. "It's a horrible conflict," said Marti Fredericks, executive director of the agency that runs the Sacramento-area homes, but not the one in Elk Grove. She agreed to discuss her program on condition that its name and location not be revealed because she is prohibited by laTM from identifying them. "We want to feel safe in our neighborhoods. Nobody, including me, would want to have a group home next door," Fredericks said. "But we have to be in somebody's neighborhood. So you try to make the best choice you can, where you'll have the least amount of impact." By law, group homes are designed to provide youths with the most homelike setting possible with therapists and mentors to guide them to productive lives. For years, California law has been based on the philosophy that troubled children should receive help, not punishment, because children are more likely to be rehabilitated than adults. When group homes first became licensed about 20 years ago, they were modeled on that line of thought. "The notion is that these kids are not developmentally finished," said Carroll Schroeder, executive director of the California Alliance of Child and Family Services, a lobbying group for nonprofit agencies that aid troubled families. "They're still growing up. And adolescents are always trying on new ways of acting, new friends. So there really is a belief that these kids can change. Nothing has to be a lifelong pattern." Experts say that is especially true when dealing with young sex offenders. Most teens have not yet cemented their sexual habits, and at least one psychologist who treats these sex offenders said that allows a critical window of opportunity for therapy. "The earlier you get them, the more malleable the sexual behaviors are," said Baljit Atwal, who evaluates young offenders and makes recommendations for care to Sacramento County's juvenile court judges. "With an adult, their personality is developed, and it's very, very difficult to change them at that point. Especially their sexual attractions." [continued on next page] 28 California Research Bureau, California State Library Atwal said she looks at a variety of criteria when deciding whether to recommend that a child go to a group home, the California Youth Authority, or elsewhere. These include the level of force or aggression used to subdue the victim, the level of criminal sophistication, the Offender's willingness to admit the crime and whether the offender was himself a victim of molestation. Typical group-home candidates are first-time offenders who have not been physically aggressive with their victims and have chosen members of their own family to victimize. In most cases, Atwal has found, young offenders are repeating abuses that happened to them. "Would we get someone (bound for a group home) who stalks their victims and whisks them away from their local park or school? Probably not," said Steve Clanton, who oversees the placement unit, which includes group homes, for Sacramento County's Probation Department. "Any type of real predatory, violent sexual act would get (a youth sent to) the California Youth Authority." Of the group-home youths she treats, Frederick said, boys often select victims who mirror the appearance and circumstances of their own molestation. "He's kind of gotten frozen at that age where he was molested," Fredericks said. "And so we are really talking through their own victim issues, so they can understand why they molest others." Across California, 11,500 children - nearly 12 percent of the state's foster care population - live in nearly 1,700 group homes. Sacramento County has 98 group homes dedicated to treating a variety of adolescent problems. Each is specially designed to teach children to variously manage their anger, stop drinking or doing drugs, or stop molesting young children. Although the Elk Grove home, and the homes that Fredericks runs, cater to juvenile delinquents, just 6,800 of the state's 97,000 foster children have faced criminal charges. The rest have been removed from their families to protect them after allegations that they were being abused or neglected. But many foster children also have been caught acting in sexually inappropriate ways, including many who hadn't initially disclosed that they were victims of molestation. That's why officials say there will continue to be more group homes dedicated to treating them. State officials don't categorize group homes by treatment type, so it is unclear how many of the state's group homes provide sex-offender therapy. Tn Sacramento County, however, probation officials estimate that 15 percent to 20 percent of the group homes do treat sex offenders. Nonetheless, the demand for care far outpaces the number of available beds. in Fredericks' program, for example, 20 youths were accepted last year into six group homes for a program that lasts about two years. An additional 48 youths were approved for admission and put on a waiting list but were never admitted. Sixty-three more were refused because their crimes were too violent or they had too many mental health problems to do well in such care. Schroeder, of the Alliance of Child and Family Services, said Californians can't afford not to treat them. "if we just lock them away, you might not have to worry about them for a year or two," he said. "But terrible things are going to happen to that kid when you lock him away. And then you've got a real problem - for a long time." The Sacramento Bee November :t:t, 2002 Califomia Research Bureau, California State Library 29 PLANNED HOME FOR DISABLED DRAWS OPPOSZTZON By JENNIFER VIGIL, Staff Writer The families want a specially equipped home for their disabled loved ones. The residents of Fourth Street in National City want the building to fit into their neighborhood of small ranch homes. Both sides have clashed in recent weeks as the Cheneweth Foundation, owner of the site proposed for the group home, has wended its way through the city's application process. The city's Planning Commission, despite reservations, approved the project this week, a decision that is final unless opponents appeal the'matter to the City Council. The council, however, will discuss on Tuesday whether a public hearing is warranted to review the decision. The foundation, which aims to help the disabled become better integrated into the community, hopes to build a 3,800-square-foot facility that will be home to six people, with a small staff to aid them. To achieve that goal, the foundation purchased two lots on Fourth, demolished the existing homes and prepared plans for one large structure equipped with hundreds of thousand of dollars worth of upgrades. Those are needed to allow disabled people to use the home. Alarmed residents, however, question why a large facility should be allowed to locate near single-family homes and say city zoning laws should preclude such an operation in a residential area. "We're never against anybody living in the neighborhood as long as they obey National City's laws," said Ronald Bib, who lives across the street from the proposed development. State law, however, allows for such facilities in areas zoned as residential, provided that six people or fewer live in them, and requires that cities and counties comply. Proponents argue that the home must be large, with outsized doorways and other amenities, so wheelchair users can get around with ease. "We don't want you to give these people special privileges," Pam Brunson, the foundations' program director, told planning commissioners. "We just want you to accommodate their needs." The residents and planning commissioners also have had to endure accusations of intolerance, which they vigorously deny. "What I'm hearing is some people have the right to live as they want, but they don't seem to feel people with developmental disabilities have the same rights," said Elaine Barrack of La Mesa, who wants her daughter to move into the home. They are not biased against the disabled, residents and city officials insist, but are fearful that a large home resembling a medical facility will tower over the middle-class neighborhood and alter its character. The area, about a block from Paradise Valley Hospital and several medical-office buildings, is surrounded by single-story homes, some on raised foundations with manicured lawns, others on dirt lots .... "We did not deny this because they will be taking care of disabled people," said Frank Parra, the commission's chairman, in reference to the group's previous votes against the project. "It's strictly because of the fact that it looks like an institution." 30 Califomia Research Bureau, California State Library The planning commission's objections led the Cheneweth Foundation to slightly shrink its plans and turn the building around, to reduce the number of entrances facing Fourth. Planners also dropped the roof height to 17 feet, and commissioners asked them to look at moving more doors and installing mo re landscaping. Residents had asked that they build two new homes, rather than one large facility, a suggestion that the home's supporters say would be impractical and prohibitively expensive.. Foundation officials say they cannot afford to stock two structures with the specialized equipment the home's residents would require and that they already spent $40,000 to redesign their plans to satisfy the commission. The equipment includes deep tubs for the bathrooms, computers and a ceiling-rail system that would allow those with some mobility to guide themselves from room to room without wheelchairs. The rails cost $10.000 a room, Brunson said .... The home will be built six months after city permits are issued, Brunson said. The foundation is planning three more homes but hasn't determined where they will be located. The San Diego Union-Tribune October 12, 2002 Califomia Research Bureau, California State Library 31 SUPES CONTi'NUE GROUP HOME PUBLTC HEARTNG By MARTI TAYLOR-DN Staff Writer Agencies will have to discuss concerns with residents. "! don't want it in my community!" Those were the sentiments echoed at a public hearing held by the Tehama County Board of Supervisors by a handful of residents near what could become two new group homes in Red Bluff. North Valley Children Family Services has proposed to locate two group homes on Dawn Drive in Red Bluff which are less than 300-feet apart. NVCFS has contracted with the Tehama County Department of Social Services to establish and operate a 24-hour facility that will address the needs of two unserved categories of youth ages 12 to 17. The State of California Department of Social Services provides the board of supervisors the opportunity to protest the licensing of group homes if the homes are located within 300~feet of each other. Several residents of the Dawn Drive and White Road community spoke during the public testimony section of the hearing asking the board to consider protesting the licensing and approval of one of the group homes. "It is tough enough to raise my four daughters without a criminal element being introduced into our neighborhood," said resident Kevin Cruz. Fellow resident Danielia Sartori called the introduction of the homes a, "prescription for disaster." Randi GotUieb Robinson spoke on behalf of social services along with Rich North of NVCFS, to clarify misconceptions regarding the homes. Gottlieb Robinson told the audience the reason the location was identified was because of the ability to have homes close enough together to run one facility but to separate the genders. Gottlieb Robinson also dispelled rumors that the homes would be for delinquent or criminal youth. "This is not a population of children who have ever broken the law. It is a teenage crisis and runaway center. It will serve a pre-delinquent population," said Gottlieb Robinson. The program would service those who are not in foster care but are temporarily out of their homes and are at risk of entering the system and those who are entering the foster system and placed into emergency care by Child Protective Services. The program would serve youth for a period up to but not exceeding 30 days. The proposed homes will each have a six-bed capacity and be located across the street from one another. One home would service girls and the other would service boys. As well both homes would have around the clock "awake" supervision consisting of a minimum of two staff members for each house. The board voted unanimously to continue the matter 60 days in an effort to give NVCFS and social services adequate time to go out into the community and dispel rumors as well as inform the community of the accurate facts regarding the homes. The board will return to the matter at their meeting on Oct. 8. Red Bluff Daily News August 2:L, 2002 32 Califomia Research Bureau, Califomia State Library Appendix B - State Laws and Regulations on Residential Facilities Facility Type Licensing Statute Code of CA Entity Regulations Group Home DSS Health and Safety Title 22 (H&S) Code 84000-84808 Section 1500 Adult Residential Facility DSS H&S Code Title 22 Section 1500 85000-85091.4 Social Rehabilitation DSS H&S Code Title 22 Facility Section 1500 81000- 81088 Residential Care Facility/ DSS H&S Code Title 22 Elderly Section 1569 87100- 87731.4 Residential Care Facility/ DSS H&S Code Title 22 Chronically Ill Section 1568.01 87800-87924 Alcoholism & Drug Abuse DAPD H&S Code Title 9 Recovery/Treatment Section 11834.01 10500-10631 Facility Congregate Care Facility DHS H&S Code Title 17 Section 1267.8 56100-56610 Intermediate Care Facility/ DHS H&S Code Title 17 DD Section 1267.8 56100-56610 Intermediate Care Facility/ DHS H&S Code -Title 17 DD- Habilitative Section 1267.8 56100- 56610 Intermediate Care Facility/ DHS H~S Code Title 17 DD-Nursing Section 1267.8 56100-56610 Califomia Research Bureau, Califomia State Library 33 34 California Research Bureau, California State Library Appendix C - State Laws Related to Siting of Residential Care Facilities Health and Safety Zoning - Health facilities Licensed residential health facilities with six or fewer (H&S) Code persons and congregate care facilities are considered Section 1267.8 residential use of property; residents and operators are considered a family for zoning purposes. H&S Code Overconcentration - Health State policy to prevent overconcentration of health Section 1267.9 facilities facilities. New facilities must be 300 feet or more from existing residential health or community care facilities (except for Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly); congregate living facilities must be 1000 feet or more from other existing facilities. Local government must approve requests for shorter distances. H&S Code Overconcentration - State policy to prevent overconcentration of Section 1250.5 Community Care Facilities residential care facilities. New facilities must be 300 (Group Homes, Adult feet or more from existing community care facilities Residential Facilities, Social(except for Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly). Rehabilitation Facilities) Local government must approve requests for shorter distances. H&S Code Zoning - Community Care Licensed residential community care facilities with six Section 1566.3 Facilities (Group Homes, or fewer persons are considered residential use of Adult Residential Facilities, property; residents and operators are considered a Social Rehabilitation family for zoning purposes. Facilities) H&S Code Zoning - Residential Care Licensed residential care facilities for the elderly with Section 1569.85 Facilities for the Elderly six or fewer persons are considered residential use of property; residents and operators are considered a family for zoning purposes. H&S Code Legislative Intent State policy that each county and city allow and Section 11834 Local Regulation/Zoning - encourage enough recovery or treatment facilities to meet local needs. Licensed facilities that serve six or Alcoholism or Drug Abuse fewer persons are not subject to any local taxes, Recovery or Treatment Facilities permits or fees not applicable to single-family homes; facilities are considered residential use of property; residents and operators are considered a family for zoning purposes. Califomia Research Bureau, Califomia State Library 35 Welfare and Legislative Intent State policy that persons with disabilities are entitled Institutions (W&I) Zoning - Persons with to live in normal residential surroundings. Care of six Code disabilities or fewer persons with disabilities is residential use of Section 5115 property for zoning purposes. W&! Code Zoning - Facilities for Licensed family care or group home for six or fewer Section 5116 children children with disabilities or dependent and neglected children is considered residential use of property for zoning purposes. 36 Califomia Research Bureau, Califomia State Library Appendix D- Recent Legislation Related to Siting of Residential Care Facilities (1997-2002) 1997 Chapter 561 ~ 323 Created pilot ~ S~ Bem~d~o Co,tx to enco~age (Baca) ~oup homes to work wi~ neighborhood resid~ts to resolve issues ~d reduce compla~ts. CDSS exp~ded pilot to Shasta Co~. (SCR 27 recommen~tion) 1997 Died ~ ~ 631 Requ~ed ~at person released on probation p~icipate ~ a Co~i~ee (Mo~ow) licensed facility if requ~ed to go ~ough alcohol ~d ~g abuse rehabilitation pro~. (SCR 27 reco~en~tion) 1997 Di~ ~ ~ 756 Extended the overconc~ation requirement to 1000 feet. Co~i~ee (Kuykendall) 1997 Died ~ ~ 1288 Requ~ed prior local gove~ent approval for ~oup Co~i~ee ~ood) homes hous~g residents convicted of a serious or violent felony or a resid~tial b~gl~. 1997 Died ~ SB 139 Extended ~e 300-foot overconcentration requ~ement to Co~i~ee ~opp) ~cohol md &ug facilities. 1997 Chapter 96 SCR 27 Established SCR 27 rusk force comprised of local ~opp) government ~d social service representatives to ad,ess co~ity concerns res~t~g ~om ~ ~crease of residential c~e ~d trea~t facilities ~d m~e reco~en~tions. 1998 Chapter 898 ~ 1068 Requ~ed cr~al backwood check for previously (C~pbell) exempt social rehabilitation facilities; ext~ded backwood check for ~te~ediate c~e facilities/developmentally disabled to ~ect c~e stuff ~d others. 1998 Chapter 311 SB 933 ~ovided a comprehensive s~ies of ~oup home refo~s (~ompson, ~cluding several ch~ges to ~prove m~agem~t ~d GH Refo~ staff ~ain~g, ~d acco~tability ~d oversight B~) requ~ements. Ex~ples: requ~ed ~at ~oup homes f~st be issued a tempor~ provisional license that c~ be susp~ded if~e facili~ is not ~ compli~ce; cl~ified that ~oup home have specific comm~ity representatives (~e neighbors) on exist~g bo~ of ~ectors or adviso~ bo~d; req~ed a "Good Neighbor" h~dbook; ~d expedited the fmge~r~t process. (SCR 27 reco~en~tions ~cluded) Califomia Research Bureau, California State Library 37 1998 Vetoed/ SB 1540 Required a plan for establishing and maintaining a Fiscal issues (Karnette) statewide computerized data base for all community care facilities and alcoholism and drug abuse treatment and recovery facilities; and a plan for identifying and regulating existing unlicensed residential programs. (SCR 27 recommendation) 1998 Died in SB 1971 Required that an assessment be developed of the committee (Watson) residential needs of persons who live in licensed residential facilities and persons who live in other living arrangements in which services are provided. Required that a statewide database be established and maintained. (SCR 27 recommendation) 1999 Gutted/ AB 373 [Previous language extended separation requirement from Converted (Pacheco) 300 to 1,000 feet.] 1999 Never heard AB 533 Clarified that facility operator cannot claim "six or fewer" in committee (Nakano) status if operating two or more facilities located within 1,000 feet of each other. 1999 Died in AB 997 Prohibited additional licenses to providers who have not Assembly (Campbell) operated their facilities well in existing communities; added language that strengthens role of group home community advisory body. 1999 Died in AB 1025 Added language that strengthens role of group home Assembly (Havice) community advisory body. (SCR 27 recommendation) 1999 Died in SB 268 Required that residential facilities for the elderly be committee (Rainey) counted for purposes of the 300-foot separation requirement. 1999 Vetoed/ SB 887 Strengthened laws associated with group home operator Fiscal issues) (Ortiz) fraud. 1999 Vetoed/ SB 986 Required sober living facilities that offer services and Fiscal issues (Karnette) programs to be state licensed. (SCR 27 recommendation) 1999 Died in SB 987 Required the Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs committee (Kamette, to administer licensing and regulation of alcohol and drag Follow-up to facilities. [Previous amendments that required group SB 1540) home siting locations to be posted on DSS website, authorized local needs assessment and siting plans to be developed as part of general plan, and required "Good Neighbor" handbooks to be distributed to neighbors were deleted from the bill.] (SCR 27 recommendation) 38 California Research Bureau, Califomia State Library 2001 Chapter 188 AB 950 Required that training and testing requirements apply to (Wright) direct care staffpersons employed in a licensed community care facility for persons with developmental disabilities that receives regional center funding. (SCR 27 recommendation) 2002 Vetoed/Fiscal AB 2175 Required Governor's Office of Planning and Research to & workload (Daucher) develop and adopt guidelines for addressing human issues services matters (including assessment of residents in care facilities) within the local govemment's general plan to improve quality of life for targeted members and community. (SCR 27 recommendation) (SCR 27 recommendation) = requirement consistent with SCR 27 Task Force recommendation Califomia Research Bureau, Califomia State Library 39 40 Califomia Research Bureau, Califomia State Library Bibliography and Selected Resources American Planning Association. Policy Guide on Community Residences. American Planning Association Newsletter. [1997] http://wl.planning, org/policyguides/commres.htm Andre, Claire and Manual Velasquez. "Not in My Backyard." Issues in Ethics 2, no. 1 (Winter 1989). Blacksher, Susan. "On Drug Abuse Treatment Centers: Listen to Neighbors, Not Naysayers." The San Diego Union-Tribune. May 29, 2002. Boddy, Chet. Zoning. 2000. (Mr. Boddy is a Real Estate Appraiser in Medocino, Califomia.) http://www, chetboddy, com/articles/zoning.htm Brown, Mareva. "Group Homes: Big Needs, Big Fears." The Sacramento Bee. November 11, 2002. Metro Section, B 1. California Association of Health Facilities (CAHF). "Services Under the Lanterman Act." Sacramento: CAHF. http://www.cahf/public/dsc/lanterman.php Califomia. Department of Alcohol and Drag Programs. Alcohol- and Drug-Free Housing (Sober Living). Licensing & Certification of Alcoholism or Drug Abuse Recovery or Treatment Programs and Licensing of Alcoholism or Drug Abuse Recovery or Treatment Facilities: The Most Frequently Asked Questions. Sacramento: the Department, April 2001. Fact Sheets. Califomia. Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs. Good Neighbor Guidelines: Establishing and Maintaining Positive Relationships in the Community. Guidebook for Residential Alcohol and Drug Abuse Facilities. Sacramento: the Department, revised February 2000. Califomia. Depamnent of Alcohol and Drug Programs. Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000, First Annual Report to the Legislature. Sacramento: the Depamnent, November 2002. Califomia. Department of Developmental Services. Olmstead Planning in California. Sacramento: the Department. http://www.dds.ca.go v/ltcc/main/olmsteadplanning, cfm California. Department of Social Services, Community Care Licensing Division. "Comprehensive Evaluation Tool for Group Home Evaluations." Evaluator .Manual. Sacramento: the Department, January 2000. Cahfomia. Department of Social Services. Community Care Licensing Division. Facts You Need to Know: Group Home Board of Directors. Sacramento: the Department, 1999. Califomia. Department of Social Services. Community Care Licensing Division. Technical Support Program. Group Home Providers: Establishing and Maintaining Positive Relationships in the Community. Sacramento: the Department, December 2001. Self-Assessment Guide. Califomia Research Bureau, Califomia State Library 41 Califomia. Govemor's Office of Planning and Research. Edited by Nancy Patton. 1997 Planning, Zoning, and Development Laws. Sacramento: the Office, June 1997. http ://ceres. ca. go v/p lanning/pzd/1997/intro.html. Califomia. Govemor's Office of Planning and Research. "Zoning of Homes or Facilities for Mentally Disordered, Handicapped Persons, or Dependent and Neglected Children (Excerpts from the Welfare and Institutions Code)." 2002 Planning, Zoning, and Development Laws. Sacramento: the Office, 2000. http://ceres.ca.gov/planning/pzd/2000/pzd2000 web/l~zd2000 miscl5.html. California. Senate Health and Human Services Committee. Senate Concurrent Resolution 27: Residential Care and Treatment Facilities Report to the Legislature and the Governor. Prepared for the Care Facilities Task Force. Sacramento: Senate Publications, 1998. Foster, Lisa IC Foster Care Fundamentals: An Overview of California's Foster Care System. Sacramento: Califomia Research Bureau, California State Library, December 2000. Ganthe, Ted H. Group Homes: Local Control and Regulation Versus Federal and State Fair Housing Laws. Prepared for the Washington State Bar Association Land Use Conference, May 1997). WashIngton: Municipal Research and Services Center, 1997. http://www.mrsc.org/legal/ganthe/htnx Institute for Public Strategies. Prop. 36: The Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000. National City: the Institute. May 2002. Fact Sheet. Institute for Pubhc Strategies. Treatment: Frequently Asked Questions. National City: the Institute. May 2002. Fact Sheet. League of Califomia Cities. Summary of Existing Policy and Guiding Principles. Sacramento: the League. March 2002. League of Califomia Cities. "Results of League Survey of Cities on Group Home Issues." Letter from Dan Camgg, Legislative Representative, to Members, Assembly Human Services Committee, Assembly Local Govemment Committee, Senate Health and Human Services Committee, Senate Local Govemment Committee, and Legislative Secretary, Governor's Office. February 8, 2000. Mecoy, Laura. "A Troubled Cure" A Sacramento Bee Special Report: Two-Part Series on Proposition 36. Sacramento Bee, Los Angeles Bureau. July 1- 2, 2001. Mirra, Michael. Group Homes and Zoning Under the Fair Housing Act. Building Better Communities Network, April 1998. http://216.118.74.208/index.cfm?method=grouphomes. Rowe, Peter. "Treatment Centers are Great, But Put This One Elsewhere." San Diego Union-Tribune. April 25, 2002. Lifestyle Section, E- 1. Taylor, Marti. "Supes Continue Group Home Public Heahng." Red Bluff Daily News. August 21, 2002. 42 California Research Bureau, California State Library U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. National Institute on Drug Abuse. How to Succeed in Siting a Drug Abuse Treatment Center. Washington D.C.: the Depamnent, 1992. U.S. Department of Justice. Civil Rights Division. Housing and Civil Enforcement Section. The Fair Housing Act. Washington D.C.: the Department. http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/housing/housing_coverage.htm U.S. Department of Justice. Civil Rights Division. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Americans with Disabilities Act Questions and Answers. Washington D.C.: the Department, August 1999. U.S. Department of Justice. Civil Rights Division. A Guide to Disability Rights Laws. Washington D.C.: the Department, August 1999. U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Group Homes, Local Land Use, and the Fair Housing Act. A Joint Statement. Washington D.C.: the Departments, August 2001. Vigil, Jennifer. "Planned Home for Disabled Draws Opposition; Size is Questioned in National City." The San Diego Union-Tribune. October 12, 2002. B4 and B6. Whitman, Cameron and Susan Pamas. Fair Housing: The Siting of Group Homes for the Disabled and Children. Local Officials Guide. Washington D.C.: The National League of Cities, 1999. USEFUL WEBSITES Califomia Law: http://www.leginfo.ca, gov/calaw.html Califomia Code of Regulations: http://www.calregs.com/ Califomia Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs, Licensing and Certification Branch: information about hcensing Alcohol and Drug Treatment or Recovery Facilities, http ://www.adp.cahwnet. gov/LCB/LCBhome.shtml Califomia Department of Health Services, Licensing and Certification: information about licensing community health facilities, http://www.dhs.cabwnet, gov/lnc/default.htm California Department of Social Services, Community Care Licensing Division: information about licensing community care facilities, http://www.ccld.ca, gov/default, htm Drug Policy Alliance. California Proposition 36 - The Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000: information about SACPA implementation activities, http://www.prop36.org/ League of Califomia Cities: information about local perspective and policies on residential care facilities, http://www.cacities.org/doc.asp?intParentID=-1018 Califomia Research Bureau, Califomia State Library 43 44 Califomia Research Bureau, Califomia State Library Notes I Califomia Senate Health and Human Services Committee, Senate Concurrent Resolution 27: Residential Care and Treatment Facilities Report to the Legislature and the Governor (Sacramento: Senate Publications, 1998); and Cameron Whitman and Susan Pamas, Fair Housing: The Siting of Group Homes for the Disabled and Children, Local Officials Guide (Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1999) i. 2 Peter Rowe, "Treatment Centers are Great, But Put This One Elsewhere," San Diego Union-Tribune, Lifestyle Section, E-1, April 25, 2002. 3 California Senate Health and Human Services Committee, Senate Concurrent Resolution 27, p 4; and American Planning Association, Policy Guide on Community Residences, American Planning Association Newsletter [1997] 6, at http://w 1 .planning. org/policyguides/commres.htm 4 League of Califomia Cities. "Results of League Survey of Cities on Group Home Issues." Letter from Dan Camgg, Legislative Representative, to Members, Assembly Human Services Committee, Assembly Local Govemment Committee, Senate Health and Human Services Committee, Senate Local Govemment Committee, and Legislative Secretary, Governor's Office. February 8, 2000. 5 The Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act, Welfare and Institutions Code Division 4.5, starting with Section 4500. 6 California Senate Health and Human Services Committee, Senate Concurrent Resolution 27 Report (Sacramento: Senate Publications, 1998). 7 Lisa Foster, Foster Care Fundamentals: An Overview of California's Foster Care System, (Sacramento: Califomia Research Bureau, California State Library, December 2000) 23-24. Foster care is the 24-hour out-of-home care provided to children in need of substitute parenting because their own families are unable or unwilling to care for them. This report describes the role of group homes for children. 8 Califomia Department of Social Services website at http://www/dss/cahwnet.gov/cdssweb/Residentia 180.htm 9 Califomia Department of Alcohol and Drag Programs website at http://www.adp.cahwnet, gov/LCB/LCBhome.shtml l0 Califomia Department of Developmental Services website at http://www.dds.ca, gov. livingarmng/main/icf001.cfm; and Califomia Care Network website at httv//www.calcarenet, ca.~ov/continuous med care facs.asv i 1 Michael Mirra, Group Homes and Zoning Under the Fair Housing Act. Building Better Communities Network, April 1998, at http://216.118.74.208/index.cfm?method=grouphomes Califomia Research Bureau, California State Library 45 ~2 U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Group Homes, Local Land Use, and the Fair Housing Act. A Joint Statement. (Washington D.C.: the Departments, August 2001). ~3 42 U.S.D. 3504(f)(3)(B); and Cameron Whitman and Susan Pamas, Fair Housing Local Officials Guide, 8-9. ~4 U.S. Department of Justice, A Guide to Disability Rights Laws (Washington D.C.: the Department, August 1999) 1- 3. ~ 5 Califomia Department of Developmental Services, Olmstead Planning in California (Sacramento: the Department). http://www.dds.ca, gov/ltcc/main/olmsteadplanning.cfin 16 California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Govemment Code Sections 12900- 12996); Unmh Civil Rights Act (Civil Code Section 51); Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act (Welfare and Institutions Code Sections 4500-4903); Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (Welfare and Institutions Code Sections 5000-5550); and Civil Code Section 54.1. ~7 Welfare and Institutions Code Sections 5115-5116; Health and Safety Code starting with Section 1400. ~ 8 Califomia Department of Social Services, Community Care Licensing, Evaluator Manual, Comprehensive Evaluation Tool for Group Home Evaluations (California: the Department, January 2000) and Licensing Regulations, Title 22; Califomia Department of Alcohol and Drag Programs Licensing Regulati°ns, Title 9; and California Department of Health Services Licensing Regulations, Title 17. See page 36 for specific sections. 19 Code of Federal Regulations, Title 42, Chapter 1 Part 2 require confidentiality for residents of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Recovery and Treatment Facilities; Health and Safety Code Sections 1557.5 requires that Group Home, Adult Residential Care, and Social Rehabilitation Facilities "protect the privacy and confidentiality" of information about residents; Health and Safety Code Section 87870(c) provides confidentiality for residents of Residential Care Facilities for the Chronically Ill; and Health and Safety Code Section 87570(c) provides confidentiality for residents of Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly. 20 California Department of Social Services, Group Home Providers: Establishing and Maintaining Positive Relationships in the Community, Self-Assessment Guide (Sacramento: the Department, December 2001) 6. 2~ Health and Safety Code Section 1524.5. 22 Chet Boddy, Zoning, 2000 at http://www.chetboddy, com/articles/zoning.htm Mr. Boddy is a Real Estate Appraiser in Mendocino, Califomia. 23 Cameron Whitman and Susan Pamas, Fair Housing Local Officials Guide, 12. 24 Cameron Whitman and Susan Pamas, Fair Housing Local Officials Guide, 19-20; and U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Group Homes, Local Land Use, and the Fair Housing Act. 46 California Research Bureau, Califomia State Library 25 League of California Cities, Summary of Existing Policy and Guiding Principles, March 2002, at http://www.cacities.org/doc.asp?intParentlD=1019 26 American Planning Association, Policy Guide on Community Residences, American Planning Association Newsletter [1997] 6, at http://wl.planning, org/policyguides/commres.hlm; and Cameron Whitman and Susan Pamas, Fair Housing Local Officials Guide, p 16. 27 California Senate Health and Human Services Committee, Senate Concurrent Resolution 27 Report, 4, 14. 28 Califomia Senate Health and Human Services Committee, Senate Concurrent Resolution 27 Report. 29 California Department of Social Services, letter from Martha Lopez, Deputy Director, Community Care Division, to Regional Managers and Residential District Office Managers, on "Commitment to Work with Local Govemment on Group Home Issues," September 29, 1999. 30 Institute for Public Strategies Fact Sheet, Prop 36: The Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000 (National City, the Institute, March 2000). 3~ Califomia Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs, Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000 First Annual Report to the Legislature, November 2002, (Sacramento, the Department, November 2002), Executive Summary. Certified outpatient programs increased by 81% in response to SACPA. 32 Conversation with Aly Zimmermann, Policy Analyst, League of California Cities, November 12, 2002; conversation with Eileen Sommers, Licensing Evaluator, Califomia Department of Alcohol and Drug Abuse, Licensing and Certification Division, November 12, 2002; Califomia Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs, SACPA 2000 First Annual Report to the Legislature, Executive Summary; and Susan Blacksher, "On Drug Abuse Treatment Centers: Listen to Neighbors, not Naysayers." The San Diego Union- Tribune, May 29, 2002, Opinion Section, 13-9; and Neighbors Unite, "Neighbors' Concems Regarding the Increase of"Clients" in Residential Recovery Homes," at http://www.neighborsunite.org/position.htm (accessed August 1, 2002). Califomia Research Bureau, California State Library 47 BAKERSFIELD Economic and Community Development Department MEMORANDUM ,~r...~,~% August 19, 2002 J TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager ~ ¢I/o'- FROM: Donna Kunz, Economic Development Director SUBJECT: Off-Highway Vehicle Park Report Councilman Maggard has expressed an interest in the possible development of an Off- highway Vehicle (OHV) park development within the City or County using "Green Sticker" monieS. The Green Sticker registration fee is currently $21.00 for two years for each off- highway vehicle using public lands. $7 dollars goes to the DMV for administration costs, $2 dollars goes to the highway patrol, $4 dollars go to the in-lieu gas tax fund, and the remaining $8 dollars go to the OHV program. The fuel tax for off-highway vehicle use in California provides 61% of program funds, while the registration fee provides about 7%. Annually, about 50% of all of the funding is used to support the seven state recreational vehicle areas. They are as follows: Carnegie, Prairie City, Hollister Hills, Oceano Dunes, Hungry Valley, Clay pit and Ocotillo Wells. The other 50% is awarded to federal, state and local agencies. The OHV program is administered by the State Parks and Recreation Department through the Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Division (OHMVD). It is possible for a locality to plan and develop an OHV park. In order to make an informed decision about location, amenities, environmental impact and other feasibility questions concerning the development of such a park, staff recommends that a potential site location list be developed over the next few months, gathered from recommendations from city and county planning staff, off road enthusiasts and local off-road clubs. Thelist could then be narrowed down to a few preferred sites and an application prepared for the June 2003 submittal to the State for a planning grant to examine the feasibility of the selected sites. Below are the three categories that would qualify for a locality wishing to pursue this kind of development. It is important to note that the State looks more favorable towards funding for OHV parks that are more natural and less extravagant. However, racetracks, extreme sports parks and others of this nature can qualify. There are more hoops to jump through to qualify the project. S:~DEBBIE'S~Offroad memo.doc Sources of funding. The State of California Department of Parks and Recreation, Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Division provides between 12-14 million dollars annually for the planning, development and administration of off-highway vehicle recreation access areas. Localities are invited to submit applications between March and June of each year. Three of the categories appear suitable for the planning and development of an OHV park for the City of Bakersfield. Planning Grants - 100% 'match required These grants are to be used to determine the viability of an area/Project pdor to committing acquisition, development or resource management funds. The grants are used to pay for an inventory of the features, a wildlife habitat survey, a wildlife habitat protection program and a certified environmental document. The match can be through in-kind services- equipment, personnel, etc. Acquisition Grants - 100% fundin9 These funds can be used for the acquisition of land and improvements to expand or assure adequate OHV supply. Eligible costs include purchase, appraisals, escrow costs, title insurance and reports. Development Grants - 100% fundinq The range of activities is very extensive some common things include: trail construction, restrooms, fencing access roads and camping facilities. Operations and Maintenance - 25% match required of local aqencies These are the usual and customary operating and maintenance costs to run the Park that are of a recurring nature. Some one-time costs are also eligible. There are many OHV parks located throughout California, the larger ones are owned and managed by the State of California or Bureau of Land Management. I have attached a list of the available parks in California for your information. I contacted Mr. Meacham from the Parks Department of Porterville concerning their OHV park. Currently they have a 17 acre motocross park for recreational riding. They are planning to expand their venues to racing in the near future. They are generating about 35% of their operations costs from fees. The state will provide up to 75% of the annual operating costs, including the cost of liability insurance. They are planning to expand another 7 acres for 4×4 training which will offer, rock crawling, stair climbing, sluice driving and frame twisters. This is designed to give 4 wheelers "practice opportunities" before people venture out to the public lands. They are also planning a BMX bicycle track. Mr. Meacham stated that the grant process was having some problems due to the state budget and the environmental hurdles that must be overcome when selecting a site. He also gave me the regional contact person for the state grants; Mr. Lowell Landowski. He suggested we contact him to discuss our plans. Attachments: Off- road parks and recreation areas in California; State Grant Application Procedures; and Sample Outline for OHV Applications S:~DEBBIE'S~Offroad memo.doc · ,,~ Off-road areas in California Page 1 of 11 Off-road.parks and recreation areas in California 4x4Wire TmiiTalk BBS Galleries Search Explore Your World! Short Cuts I EVents Calendar I Trail Reports I Trail Techniques I Trail Talk I I Trail shots & Tou_~h S_Dots I Destinations · REGION Select Trail by I ..................... California State Parks - OHMVR Division 1. Carnegie, 18600 Corral Hollow Road, Tracy, CA. Mail: 17999 Tesla Rd., Livermore, CA 94550, (_510) 447-9027 Or (510) 447-0426. Terrain: 1,500 acres, hill-type trail riding, hillclimbs and motocross track available. Elevations up to 1800 feet. Weather: Summer up to 105 degrees, winter mild, some rain. Open 7 days/week, .8 a.m. to sunset. Fees: Day use entrance fee $4; Camping fee $6/night. No reservations. MC, ATV & 4WD (limited). 2. Clay Pit,*from Hwy. 70, west on Oroville Dam Blvd. (Hwy. 162.), 2 mi. south on Larkin Rd., to entrance. Mail: c/o Lake Oroville SRA, 400 Glen Drive, Oroville, CA 95966. 220 acres. No fees. Open daily 8 a.m. to sunset. (530) 538-2200. MC, A'I'V, DB. 3. Holliste[ Hills, 7800 Cienega Rd., Hollister, CA 95023, (408) 637-3874. Terrain: 6,627 acres of mixed chaparral, oak woodlands and grasslands facility. Elevations 800 ft.-2600 ft. facility. Temperatures: summer, Iow-mid 90's, winter, iow 60's - upper 70's. Open daily 24 hours. Fees: Day use entrance fee $4/vehicle, $6 camping. No reservations. Call for Special events information. MC, 4WD, Arv, DB, (4WD & DB call ahead). 4. Hungry Valley, 50301 Peace Valley Road, Gorman, CA, (805) 248-7007. Mail: P.O. Box 1360, Lebec, CA, 93243-1360. Terrain: Ranges from 2,600 ft. to over 8,000 ft. on adjoining Los Padres National Forest. 137 miles of OHV Trails and roads in Hungry Valley's 19,000 acres and over 150 miles of National Forest OHV routes pass through high desert, rolling hills, arroyos, scrubland and steep pine-forested mountains. 4-Wheel Drive Obstacle Course and an under 60cc fenced jumior rider play area open to the public. Motocross Track by permit only to promoters and organized clubs. 10 developed camp areas, 150 campsites with shade ramadas, fire rings, picnic tables and primitive toilets. No water. Open daily, 24 hours. Fees: Day use $4, Camping $6. No reservations. MC, ATV, 4WD. 5. Ocotillo Wells, Hwy 78, Ocotillo Wells, CA. Mail: P.O. Box 360, Borrego Springs, CA 92004, (760) 767-5391. Over 4:2,000 acres of desert terrain, from below sea level to 400 ft. elevations. Picnic tables, shade ramadas, fire rings and dump station available. No Water Available. Bring plenty of drinking water. Open daily, 2.4 hours, no reservations. No fees. MC, ATV, DB, 4WD. 6. Oceano Dunes, Pismo Beach,CA Mail: 576 (:amino Mercado, Arroyo Grande, CA 9:3420, (805) 473-7230. 1,500 acres riding on beach and sand dunes. Hours: Day Use 6 a.m. to 11p.m. daily. Camping reservations required for holidays. Call: Destinet 1-800-444-7275, 10-56 days in advance. Fees: Day Use Entrance $4, Camping $6, MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. httn'//~az &v4.~; r~- ohm/tea;l h.s. nr~rt/o~/n~vtre/ RI1 Off-road areas in California Page 2 of 11 7. Prairie City, 13300 White Rock Rd., Rancho Cordova, CA 95670, (916) 985-7378. 836 acres of rolling hills. Activities include: Open M/C, ATV and 4WD areas, 1/4 Midget track, Go-Kart Track, Clay Oval Track, MX Track, Mud Drags and a 4WD Obstacle Course. Call for Special Events information. Open Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday from 8 a.m. to Sunset. Fees: Day Use Entrance $4. No camping. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. Managed by California State Parks 8. Mammoth Bar, Auburn CA. - Turn right off hwy 80 onto Auburn/ForeSthill Road, go approximately 2 miles, turn right on Old Foresthill Road and follow to entrance. 1,200 acres (hills), No. Fees.' Open year round, Hours: Winter; 8am-5pm, Summer; 8am-Spm. Temperature: Winter; 300-68°, Summer; 80°-100° Auburn State Recreation Area, P.O. Box 3266, Auburn CA 95604, (530) 885-5821 or (916) 885-4527. MC, A'I'V. BLf4 Open Areas BAKERSFIELD DISTRICT OFFICE District Manager, 3801 Pegasus Drive, Bakersfield, CA 93308-6837, (805) 391-6000. 1. Clear Creek Management Area, 30 mi. northwest of Coalinga, CA. Mail: Hollister Resource Area, 20 Hamilton Ct., Hollister, CA 95023-2535, (408) 637-8183. CAUTION: soils, dust, and water in this area contain asbestos which can be hazardous to your health. MC, 4WD, Al'V. 2.Bishop Resource Area, Mail: 785 N. Main St., Suite E, Bishop, CA 93514-2498, (760) 872-4881. Scenic semi-primitive motorized touring on back country routes in the volcanic table lands and other BLM areas. Dual Sport, MC, 4WD. BLM NORCAL 2950 Riverside., Susanville, CA 96130, (530) 257-5381. 3.Fort Sage OHV Area, - 2 mi. northeast of Doyle. Contact: Eagle Lake Resource area, 2950 Riverside., Susanville, CA 96130, (530) 257-0456. 4.Samoa Dunes, Samoa Peninsula, Eureka, CA Mail: Arcata Resource Area, 1695 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521-4573, (707) 825-2300. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 5.Black Sands Beach, 25 mi. West of Garberville, CA. Mail: Arcata Resource Area, 1695 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521, (707) 825-2300. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 6.Chappie-Shasta'ORV Area, 12 mi. north of Redding, near Shasta Dam. Mail: Redding Resource Area, 355 Hemsted Dr., Redding, CA 96002, (530) 224-2100. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 7.South'Cow Mountain Recreation Area, 10 mi. east of Ukiah. Mail: Clear Lake Resource Area 2550 N. State Street, Ukiah, CA 95482, (707) 468-4000. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. ' 8.Knoxville Recreation Area, 20 mi. North of Lake Berryessa. Mail: 2550 N. State Street, Ukiah, CA 95482, (707) 468-4000. MC, 4WD, Al'V, DB. CALIFORNIA DESERT DISTRICT OFF[CE Public lands within the California Desert provides many excellent OHV opportunities, funded in 9/2002 · 5, Off-road areas in California Page 3 of 11 part with Green Sticker funds. In addition to open area, there are thousands of miles of primitive roads and trails. For maps and information on BLM areas, or other opportunities in the California Desert, write the Bureau of Land Management, California Desert District Office, 6221 Box Springs Blvd., Riverside, CA 92507, (909) 697-5200 9.Olancha Dunes. Located 2 miles east of Olancha on State Hwy. 190. Sand dune. Designated "Open Area" consisting of 1,000 acres. Contact: Ridgecrest Resource Area, 300 S. Richmond Rd., Ridgecrest, CA 93555, (760) 384-5400. MC, 4WD, Al'V, DB. 10.Panamint Dry Lake (south). CLOSED Located 3 mi. east of. Panamint Springs on Hwy 190. Dry lake bed. Designated ."Open Area" of 2,240 acres. Contact: Ridgecrest Resource Area, 300 S. Richmond Rd., Ridgecrest, CA 93555, (619) 384-5400. MC, 4WD, Al'V, DB. 11.Spangler Hills. Located 10 mi. north of Red Mountain on Trona Re,ad. Rolling hills, steep mountains, open valleys and rocky terrain. Designated "Open Area", consisting of 57,000 acres. Contact: Ridge-crest Resource Area, 300 S. Richmond Rd., Ridgecrest, CA 93555, (760) 384- 5400. MC, 4WD, A'i'V, DB. 12.Jawbone Canyon/Dove Springs. 2811 Jawbone Canyon/Dove Springs. Cantil, CA 93519, (760) 373-1146. Located 20 mi. north of Mojave on Hwy. 14. Access is Jawbone Canyon Road and Dove Springs Road. Steep'Canyons, hill climbs,and trail riding opportunities. Contains two Designated "Open Areas" for a total of 8,570 acres of riding opportunities. 13.Dumont Dunes. Located 30 mi. north of Baker on Hwy 127, off Dumont Dunes Rd. Steep and tall sand dunes. Designated "Open Area" of 8,150 acres. Contact: Barstow Resource Area, 2601 Barstow Rd, Barstow, CA 92311, (760) 252-6000. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 14.Stoddard Valley. Located between Victorville and Barstow. Adjacent to 1-15. Access is Hodge and Sidewinder Roads. Rolling hills, steep mountains, open valleys. Designated "Open Area" consisting of 5,000 acres. DANGER - open mine shafts. Contact: Barstow Resource Area, 2601 Barstow Rd, Barstow, CA 92311, (760) 252-6000. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 15..lohnson Valley. Located 15 miles east of Lucerne Valley on Hwy 247. Access is Camp Rock, Boon and Bessemer Mine. Rolling hills, steep mountains, open valley, dry lake beds, and sand dunes. Designated "Open Area" consisting of 140,000 acres. Contact: Barstow Resource Area, 2601 Barstow Rd, Barstow, CA 92311, (760) 252-6000. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 16.Superstition Mountain. Located 15 miles north west of El Centro Via County Hwy S-80, Huff and Wheeler Roads. Varied terrain consisting of 13,000 acres; dry lakes, badlands, rocky mountains, and sand dunes. Military bombing range north and south of area is closed to entry. Contact: El Centro Resource Area, 1661 So. 4th Street, El Centro, CA 92243, (760) 337-4400 MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 17.Imperial Sand Dunes (Glamis/Gecko). Approx. 22,000 acres. Located 25 Miles east of Brawley on Hwy 78. Sand Dunes. Designated "Open Area". Heavy use area. DANGER - Adjacent military bombing range. BLM Ranger Station. Contact: El Centro Resource Area, 1661 So. 4th Street, El Centro, CA 92243, (760) 337-4400. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 18.Plaster City. Located 15 miles west of El Centro on County Hwy S-80. Consists of 41,000 acres of rolling hills and desert flats. Military bombing range north of area is closed to entry. Contact: El Centro Resource Area, 1661 So. 4th Street, El Centro, CA 92243, (760) 337-4400. MC,4WD,ATV,760 19.Imperial Sand Dunes (Buttercup Valley). Approx. 11,000 acres. Located 10 miles southeast of httn://uax~v 4~4wire cnmltraiilr¢nnrtlcalnark~/ R/IO/~O02 Off-road areas in California Page 4 of 11 Niland on the Niland/Glamis Road. Sand Dunes. Designated "Open Area". Watch for closed area boundary at south end of area. Contact: El Centro Resource Area, 1661 So 4th Street, El Centro, CA 92243, (760) 337-4400. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 20.Lark Canyon (McCain Valley). Located 70 miles east of San Diego. Exit [-8 al~ Boulevard. Rolling hills, riding limited to designated trails with overall wheel width of 40" or less. This area consists of 1,200 acres. Contact: (same address as above #19). MC, ATV. 21.Rasor. Located 45 mi. northwest of Barstow on Rasor Road. Sand washes and dunes, mesquite thickets. Designated !'Open Area" consisting of 22,500 acres. Contact: Barstow Resource Area, 150 Coolwater Lane, Barstow, CA 92311, (760) 255-8700. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 22.Imperial Sand Dunes (Mammoth Wash). Approx. 12,000 acres. Location is 15 miles, west of Yuma on [-80. Sand Dunes. Desig-nated "Open Area". Contact: El Centro Resource Area, 1661 So. 4th Stre~et, El Centro, CA 92243, (760) 337-4400. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 23.Arroyo Salado. Located 10 miles west of Hwy 86 on Hwy 78. Rolling hills and sand washes. Designated "Open Area" consisting of 4,800 acres. Adjacent to Ocotillo Wells Vehicular Recreation Area. Contact: El Centro Resource Area, 1661 So. 4th Street, El Centro, CA 92243, (760) 337- 4400.. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 24.EI Mirage/Shadow Mountains. Located 10 miles west of Adelanto on Crippen/EI Mirage Road. Dry Lake Bed. Heavy use area. Many non-motorized and motorized recreationists including aircrafts. Area consists of 24,000 acres. Contact: Barstow Resource Area, 150 Coolwater Lane, Barstow, CA 92311, (760) 255-8700. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 25.Rice Valley Dunes. Located 5 miles south of Rice Valley off of Hwy 62. Access is Santa Fe Road. Sand dunes. Designated "Open Area" consisting of 3,770 acres. Area of little use. DANGER- contaminated with unexploded ordinance. Contact: Palm Springs-South Coast Resource Area, 690 West Garnet Ave, N. Palm Springs, CA 92258-2000, (760) 251-4800 MC6 4WD, ATV, DB. 26.Parker Strip. Contact: Lake Havasu Field Office, 2610 Sweetwater Ave. Lake Havasu City, Arizona 86406-9070, (520) 505-1200 MC, ATV, DB. U.S. FOREST SERVICE 1. Mt. Baldy Ranger District, 110 N. wabash Ave., Glendora, CA 91740, (626) 335-1251. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 2.Rowher Flat, Saugus Ranger District, 30800 Bouquet Canyon Rd., Saugus, CA 91350, (805) 296-9710. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 3.Tujunga Ranger District, 12371 N. Little Tujunga Canyon Rd., San Fernando, CA 91341, (818) 899-1900. MC, A'rv, 4WD, DB. 4.Littlerock, Valermo Ranger District, 29835 Valyermo Rd., P.O. Box 15 Valyermo, CA 93563, (805) 944-2187. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. CLEVELAND NATIONAL FOREST Supervisor's Office, 10845 Rancho Bernardo Rd., San Diego, CA 92127-2107, (619) 673-6180. 5.Corral Canyon, Descanso Ranger District, 3348 Alpine Blvd., Alpine, CA 91901, (619) 637- Off-road areas in California Page 5 of 11 MC, 4WD, ATV. 6.Wildomar, Trabuco Ranger District, 1147 East 6th St., Corona, CA 91719, (619) 276-6390. MC, 4WD, ATV. ELDORADO NATIONAL FOREST Information Center, 3070 Camino Heights Drive, Camino, CA 95709 (530) 622-5061. 7.Mace Mill--Rock Creek, Georgetown Ranger District, 7600 Wentworth Springs Rd., Georgetown, CA 95634, (530) 333-4312. MC, ATV. 8.Barrett Lake, Pacific Ranger District, Pollock Pines, CA 95726, (530) 644-2349. MC, 4WD, A'FV.. 8A.Bear River Snowmobile Park, Amador Ranger District, 26820 Silver Drive Pioneer, CA 95666, (209) 295-4251. SMBL, Groomed trails and snowmobile rentals. 8B.Iron Mountain Sno-Park, (same address and phone as SA) SMBL, Groomed trails, Sno-Park parking permits required. INYO NATIONAL FOREST 873 N. Main, Bishop, CA 93514 (760) 873-2400 9.Poleta, .W. hite Mountain Ranger District, 798 N. Main St., Bishop, CA 93514, (760) 873-2500. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 9A.Shady Rest Snowmobile Park, Mammoth Ranger District, 873 N. Main, Bishop, CA 93514, (760) 924-5500. SMBL, Groomed trails. 10.Smokey Bear Flat Snowmobile Area, (same address and phone as 9A) SMBL. Groomed trails and snowmobile rentals (760) 935-4480. KLAMATH NATIONAL FOREST Supervisor's Office, 1312 Fairland Rd., Yreka, CA 96097, (530) 842-6131. 11.Medicine Lake Snowmobile Park, Goosenest Ranger District, 37805 Hwy 97, Macdoel, CA 96058, (530) 398-4391. SMBL. 12.Deer Mountain Snowmobile Park, Goosenest Ranger District, 37805 Hwy 97, Macdoel, CA 96058, (530) 398-4391. SMBL. LASSEN NATIONAL FOREST Supervisor's Office, 55 So. Sacramento St., Susanville, CA 96130, (530) 257-2151. 13.Bogard Snowmobile Area, 477-050 Eagle Lake Road, Susanville, CA 96130 Call to confirm accessibility at (530) 257-4188. SM760. 14.Ashpan Snowmobile Park, 'Hat Creek Ranger District, Box 220, Fall River Mills, Ca 96028, (530) 336-5521. SMBL. Off-road areas in California Page 6 of 11 15.Morgan Summit Snowmobile Park, Almanor Ranger District, P.O. Box 767, Chester, CA 96020, (530) 258-2141. SMBL (groomed trails). 15A.3onesville Snowmobile Park, Almanor Ranger District, P.O. Box 767, Chester, CA 96020, (530) 258-2141. SMBL groomed trails. 15B.Fredonyer Snowmobile Park, Eagle Lake Ranger District, 477-050 Eagle Lake Road, Susanville, CA 96130, (530) 257-41_88. SMBL Groomed trails. 1-5C.Swain Mountain Snowmobile Park, (530) 257-21-41 (Same info. as 1-5A) LAKE TAHOE BASIN MANAGEMENT UNIT U.S. Forest Service, 870 Emerald Bay Rd., Suite 1 So. Lake Tahoe, CA 96150, (530) 573-2600. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB, SMBL. 16.Kings Beach, U.S. Forest Service, 870 Emerald Bay Rd., Suite 1- So. Lake Tahoe, CA 961-50, (530) 573-2600. MC, 4WD, Al'V, DB. LOS PADRES NATIONAL FOREST Supervisor's Office, 6144 Calle Real, Goleta, CA 93117, (805) 683-6711. 17.Alamo Mountain, Mt. Pinos Ranger District, Star Route, Box 400, Frazier Park, CA 93225, (.805) 245-3731. MC,4WD,ATV. 18.Ballinger Canyon, Mt. Pinos Ranger District, HC1, Box 400, 34580 Lockwood Valley Rd., (805) 245-3731. MC,4WD,ATV. 19.Black Mountain (Pozo-LaPanza), Santa Lucia Ranger District, 1616 N. Carlotti Dr., Santa Maria, CA 93454, (805) 925-9538. MC, 4WD, ATV. 20.Santa Barbara Ranger District, Los Prietos Ranger Station, Star Route, Santa Barbara, CA 93105, (805) 967-3481. 21.Ortega Trail, Ojai Ranger District, 1190 E. Ojai Ave., Ojai, CA 93023, (805) 646-4348. MC (4WD, call for permit requirements). MENDOCINO NATIONAL FOREST Supervisor's Office, 825 N. Humbolt Ave. Willows, CA 95988, (530) 934-3316. 22.Davis Flat, Stonyford Ranger District, 5080 Ladoga-Stonyford, Stonyford, CA 95979, (530) 963-3128. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 23.Lake Pillsbury, Upper Lake Ranger District, 10025 Elk Mountain Rd., CA 95485, (707) 275- 2361. MC, 4WD, Al'V, DB. 24.Elk Mountain Area, Upper Lake Ranger District, 1-0025 Elk Mountain Rd., CA 95485, (707) 275- 2361. MC, 4WD, Al'V, DB. MODOC NATIONAL FOREST Off-road areas in California Page 7 of 11 Modoc National Forest, 800 W. 12th St., Alturas, CA 96101, (530) 233-5811. 25.Doorknob Trailhead, Doublehead Ranger District, P.O. Box 369, Tule Lake, CA 96134, (530) 667-2246. SMBL. PLUMAS NATIONAL FOREST Supervisor's Office, Box 11500, 159 Lawrence, Quincy, CA 95971, (530) 283-2050. 26.Gold Lake,. Beckworth Ranger District P.O. Box 7, Blairsden, CA 96103, (530) 836-2575. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB, SMBL Groomed snowmobile trails at Gold Lake. 27.Dixie Mountain, Beckworth Ranger District, P.O. Box 7, Blairsden, CA 96103, (530) 836-2575. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB, SMBL. 28.Mosquito Creek/Antelope Lake/Lights Creek/Canyon Dam Mt. Hough, Ranger District 39697 Hwy 70 Quincy, CA 95971, (530) 283-0555. 29.Deadman Springs/Snake Lake, Mt. Hough Ranger District 39697 Hwy 70 Quincy, CA 95971, (530) 283-0555. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB, SMBL. 30.Cleghorn Bar/Poker Flat/La Porte, Feather River Ranger District, 875 Mitchell Avenue, Oroville 6500. (530) 675-2462. MC, 4WD, Al'V, DB, SIVlBL. Gr(~omed snowmobile trails at La Porte. 31.Big Creek/Four Trees/French Creek/Bucks Summit, Feather River Ranger District, 875 Hitchell Avenue, Oroville 6500. (530) 675-2462. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB, SMBL. Groomed snowmobile trails at La Porte. · SAN BERNARDINO NATIONAL FOREST Supervisor's Office, 1824 Commercenter Circle, San Bernardino, CA 92408, (909) 383-5588. 32.Lake Arrowhead Area, Arrowhead Ranger District, 28104 Hwy 18, P.O. Box 350, Skyforest, CA 92385, (714) 337-2444. MC, 4WD, ATV. 33.Big Bear Lake Area, Big Bear Ranger District, Box 290, Fawnskin, CA 92333, (909) 866-3437. MC, 4WD, DB. 34.San .lacinto Area, San .lacinto Ranger District, P.O. Box 518, 54270 Pinecrest, Idyllwild, CA 92349, (909) 659-2117. MC, 4WD. 35.Lytle Creek Area, Cajon Ranger District, 1209 Lytle Creek Road, Lytle Creek, CA 92358, (909) 887-2576. SEQUOIA NATIONAL FOREST Supervisor's Office, 900 W. Grand Ave., Porterville, CA 93257, (209) 784-1500. 36.Tule River Ranger District, 32588 Hwy 190, Springville, CA 93265, (209) 539-2607. HC, SMBL. 37.Frog Meadow Area, Green Horn Ranger District, 15701 Hwy 178, Bakersfield, CA 93308, (805} 871-2223. MC, 4WD, A'I'V, DB. 38.Kennedy Meadows, Cannell Meadow Ranger District, 105 Whitney, Kernville, CA 93238, (760) httl~://www.4x4wire.com/trail/renort/e.a/narkq/ ~n a/'mno Off-road areas in California Page 8 of 11 376-3781. MC, 4WD, SMBL. 3SA.Quaking Aspen Snowmobile Area, Tule River Ranger District 32588 Hwy. 190 Spdngville, CA .93265, (209) 539-2607. SMBL 38B.Greenhorn Summit Snowmobile Area, Greenhorn-Ranger District. 15701 Hwy. 178 Bakersfield, CA 93306, (805) 871-2223. SMBL. SHASTA-TRINITY NATIONAL FOREST Supervisor's Office, 2400 Washington Ave., .Redding, CA 96001, (530) 246-5222. 39. Hayfork Area, Hayfork Ranger District, Box 159, Hayfork, CA 96041, (530) 628-5227. MC, 4-WD, ATV, DB. 40. McCIoud Ranger District, P.O. Box 1620 McCIoud, CA 96057, (530)964-2184. MC, 4WD, A'FV, DB, SMBL. 40A. Piltjrim Creek Snowmobile Park, McCIoud Ranger District, P.O. Box 1620, McCIoud, CA 96057, (530) 964-2184. SMBL. Groomed trails. SIERRA NATIONAL FOREST Supervisor's Office, 1600 Tollhouse Rd., Clovis, CA 93611, (209) 297-0706. 41. Kings River, Kings River Ranger District, 34849 Maxon Rd., Sanger, CA 93657, (209) 855- 8321. MC,' 4WD, ATV, SMBL, DB. 42. Shaver Lake Area, Pineridge Ranger District, 29688 Auberry Rd, Prather, CA 93651, (209) 855-5360. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB, SMBL. 43. Hires Cove, Mariposa Ranger District, 43060 Hwy 41, Oakhurst, CA 93644, (209) 683-4665. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB, SMBL. 44. Miami Creek, 41969 Hwy 41, Oakhurst, CA 93644, (209) ~83-4665. MC, ATV. 45. Tamarack Ridge Sno-Park, Pineridge Ranger District 29688 Auberry Rd, Prather, CA 93651, (209) 855-5360. SMBL Sno-Park parking permit is required, groomed trails. 45A. Eastwood Sno-Park, Pineridge Ranger District, 29688 Auberry Rd.,P.O. Box 559, Prather, CA 93651, (209) 855-5360. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 456. Huntington Lake Sno-Park, Pineridge Ranger District, 29688 Auberry Rd., P.O. Box 559, Prather, CA 93651, (209) 855-5360. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB, SMBL SIX RIVERS NATIONAL FOREST Supervisor's Office, 1330 Bayshore Way, Eureka, CA 95501-3834, (707) 442-1721. MC, 4WD, ATV, SMBL. 46A. Smith Rivers NRA, P.O. Box 228, 10600 Hwy 199 North, Gasquet, CA 95543, (707) 457- 3131. 4WD, A'rV. STANISLAUS NATIONAL FOREST httn://www.4x4wire.eom/trail/rer~ortJca/oarkvd 8/19/2002 off-roM areas in California Page 9 of 11 .' Supervisor's Office, 19777 Greenley Rd., Sonora, CA 95370, (209) 532-3671. MC, 4WD, Arv, SMBL, DB. 46. Niagara Ridge Area/Herring Creek Area, Summit Ranger District, I Pine Crest Lake Rd., Pine Crest, CA 95364, (209) 965-3434. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB, SMBL. 47. Date Flat Area/Moore Creek Area, Groveland Ranger District, 24545 Old Hwy 120, Groveland, CA 95321, (209) 962-7825. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 48. Deer Creek Area/Hull Creek Area, Mi-wuk Ranger District,' P.O. Box 100, Mi-wuk Village, CA 95346, (209) 586-3234. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. · 49. Corral Hollow/Spicer, Calaveras Ranger District, P.O. Box 500, Hathaway Pines, CA 95233, (209) 795-1381. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB, SMBL. · 49A. Lake Alpine Sno-Park, Calaveras Ranger District P.O. Box 500 Hathaway Pines, CA 95233, (209) 795-j381. SMBL. Sno-Park parking permits required, groomed trails, Yield to cross-country skiers. 50. Foresthill OHV Area, Foresthill Ranger District, 22830 Foresthill Road, Foresthill, CA 95631, (530) 478-6254. MC, ATV. 51. Sierraville Ranger District, 317 So. Lincoln St., P.O. Box 95, Sierraville, CA 96126, (530) 994- 3401.4WD, SMBL, DB. 52. Nevada City Ranger District, 631 Coyote St., P.O. Box 6003, Nevada City, CA 95959, (530) 265-4531.. 4V~D, SMBL, DB. 53. Fordyce 3eep Trail, Nevada City Ranger District, Hwy 49 & Coyote St., Nevada City, CA 95959, (530) 265-4531. MC, 4WD, ATV (contact district regarding accessibility). 54. Truckee Ranger District, 10342 Hwy 89 No., Truckee, CA 96161, (530) 478-6257. MC, 4WD, SMBL; DB. 55. Little Truckee Summit, Sierraville Ranger District. SMBL, groomed trails and snowmobile rentals. (530) 994-3401. 56. Prosser Hills Area, Truckee Ranger District. MC, ATV, SMBL, 4WD. (530) 587-3558. 57. China Wall Snowmobile Park, Foresthill Ranger District. Groomed trails. (530) 367-2224. 58. Downieville Ranger District, 15924 Hwy 49, Carnptonville, CA 95922, (530) 478-6253. MC, 4WD, SMBL, DB. 58A. Bassetts Snowmobile Park, Downieville Ranger District. SMBL, groomed trails and snowmobile rentals. (530) 288-3231. 58B. Yuba Pass Sno-Park, Sierraville Ranger District. SMBL, groomed trails, Sno-Park parking permit required. (530) 862-1297. 58C. Cisco Grove Sno-Park, Contact Thousand Trails Camping Resort for snow conditions for snowmobiles (530) 426-3362. Sno-Park parking permits required. httv://www.4x4wire.com/trail/reoort/caJoarks/ 8/19/2002 ;. Off, road areas in California Page 10 of 11 58D. Donner Summit Sno-Park, snowmobiles allowed up road to Castle Peak, North side of [-80 Yield to cross-country skiers! Contact.Truckee Ranger District. Sno-Park parking permit required. Unload on north side of [-80 then park in Sno-Park. (530) 582-7892. TOIYABE NATIONAL FOREST Supervisor's Office, 1200 Franklin Way, Sparks, NV 89431, (702) 355-5300. 59. Monitor Pass, Carson Ranger District, 1536 S. Carson St., Carson City, NV 89701, (702) 882- 2766. SMBL. 60. Hope Valley-Blue Lakes, Carson Ranger, 1536 S. Carson St., Carson City, NV 92243-4561, (702) 882-2766. Groomed trails and snowmobile rentals. (SMBL unsuitable in some areas. Check before you go.) Other. Cities, Counties, or Other Jurisdictions 1. Frank Raines-Deer Creek OHV Park, Del Puerto Canyon Rd., 25 mi. west of Patterson, CA 95363. Mail: Dept. of Parks & Recreation, 1716 Morgan Rd., Modesto, CA 95351, (408) 897- 3127. Fees: $2 per vehicle, $12.00 per vehicle--developed camping; $10.00 per vehicle-- undeveloped camping. 860 acres, steep terrain. Open sunrise'to sunset. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 2. Glen Helen OHV Park, 18585 Verdemont Ranch Rd., near San Bernardino, CA. Mail: P.O. Box 6950, San Bernardino, CA 92412. General Office (909) 880-3090; 300 acres. Practice Riding - Thur., Sat. & Sun. Practice Riding information 1-800-386-4469. Fee $15.00 per vehicle. No camping..MC, BMX, ATV. 3. La Grange ORV Park, Hwy ]-59, 2-1/2 mi. south of La Grange, CA. Mail: Dept. of Parks & Recreation, 1716 Morgan Rd., Modesto, CA 95351, (209) 853-2448. Fees: $10.00 per vehicle for undeveloped and $12.00 for developed camping. Day Use $2.00 per vehicle. 126 acres. Open daily, sunrise to sunset. MC, 4WD, ATV. 4. Park Moabi, Park Moabi Road, Needles, CA 92363. Mail: 825 E. Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415, (760) 326-3831. Fees: Camping: Regular: Mon.-Thur. $10.00; Fri., Sat. & Sun. $12.00. Hook-up: Mon.-Thur. $18.00 - Fri., Sat. & Sun. $20.00: Group Camping: $15/Vehicle. Day Use: $6:00. MC, ATV 5. Riverfront Park ORV Area, B12 Johnson Dr., Marysville, CA. Mail: Dept. of Parks & Recreation, 526 "C" Street., Marysville, CA 95901, (530) 741-6644. MC, 4WD, ATV, DB. 6. County of Santa Clara Motorcycle Park, Metcalf Rd., near Hwy 101, 15 mi. south of San 3ose, CA. Mail: Parks & Recreation Dept., 298 Garden Hill Dr., Los Gatos, CA 95030, (408) 226-5223. Helmets required. MC, ATV. 7. North Tahoe Public Utilities District, Recreation & Parks Dept. Mail: P.O. Box 139, Tahoe Vista, CA 96148, (530) 546-7248. SMBL. 8. Black Butte Lake, 8 mi. west of City of Orland (I-5). For information, contact Corps of Engineers, Black Butte Lake. Mail: 19225 Newville Road, Orland, CA 95963-8901. Open from 3une to February. Riding area closes at sunset. (530) 865-4781. MC, ATV. 9. Laguna Seca Recreation Area, 1025 Monterey Hwy 68, Salinas, CA 93908 (408) 755-4899, Events Info. (800) 593-8368. MC, ATV. httn'//u~v~ 4Y4wire enm/trail/rennrt/e.a/narkq/ 8/19/2002 · :. ',~ff-road areas in California Page 11 of 11 10. Tulare Cycle Park, on Paige Ave. 3 miles west of Hwy 99, take the Paige Ave. exit off Hwy 99. Mail: City of Tulare Parks, 830 South Blackstone St., Tulare, CA 93274, (209) 685-0503. Schedule and fee vary by event. MC, ATV 11. Hanford Cycle Park, Hwy 198 to 10 Ave., go South to Fairgrounds, 810 Soutih 10th. Mail: 847 E. Lacey Blvd., Hanford, CA 93230. (209) 583-1174 or (209) 582-6716. Schedule and fees vary by event. !~1C, ATV. 12. City of Porterville OHV Park, take Scranton Ave. off Hwy 190, go left on West Rd., Mail: City of Porterville Parks, P.O. Box 432, Porterville, CA 93258-0437. (209) 782-4010. Fees $5.00 per MC or Quad, $1.00 per spectator, open 8am to 3pm on Saturdays, except in case of rain. MC, A'I'V. Trail list I. 4X4Wire I Site Zndex I Links Zndex I Search 4x4Wire I I Trail Talk BBS I E-mail Lists I Events Calendar '1 Photo Galleries I Advertising Xrlfo I Xnformation I About Us I Please support 4x~Wire by v/siting our featured sponsors This site and ail original materials contained herein are Copyright © ~.999,2000,200~.,2002 by OutdoorWire, Inc. - "" -- All Rights Reserved. The use of this website, OutdoorWIre, or any of its publications or services is subject to the I;erms of use aareement. You may link freely to this site, but no further use is allowed without the express written permission of the owner of this material. All corporate trademarks are the property of their respective owners and are used to refer to those specific products or activities related to those products. OutdoorWire's use of these trademarks in its stories in no way infers that any relationship exists between OutdoorWire and the trademark owner. Any or alt activiUes and/or actions depicted in this site may be hazardous, the authors of this material only relate their personal experiences and this publication does not endorse or recommend any particular activity or action. Please use common sense and discretion before engaging in any activity. At all times remember: Safety First. This publication and the Outdoor Recreation Network assume no liability for your use of the material contained within this site. OutdoorWIre, 4x4Wire, SUVWIre, .leepWIre, are all trademarks and publications of OutdoorWIre, Inc. OutdoorWire is not affiliated with any print pub,cation. OutdoorWire is not responsible for the content of pages that are independently hosted on OutdoorWire and not part of our publication. Content Keys: OutdoorWIre'e eozines cover auto truck 4x4 suv jeep toyota. 4wd trails camp recreation outdoor ohv rockcrawl, trail parts accessories service. Pictures video 4wd cherokee wrangler cj cJ7 c"j5 grand cherokee photo vacation travel fun sand dune event rv tach projects how-to reports news magazine tires suspension radio land use acc ess conservation environment fun suv awd toyota honda ih bronco ford chevy dodge nissan isuzu mitsubishi gmc amc extreme compe titlon championship rock crawling pic travel destination vacation driving training school guide trip knn.ll,~r~ ~.zzl,~;r~, onm/trail/roncsrt/ea/naelce/ 8/19/2002 DRAFT - 03119~02 SAMPLE OUTLINE For 2002~2003 OHV Applications The 2002/03 OHMVR Grant applications are required to follow the content of the Office of Administration Law (OAL) regulations, and the 2000 OHV Grant Application Guide (rather than the 2001). This "outline" provides you with a more orderly and concise format to prepare your application for the 2002/03-grant cycle. The outline incorporates the recommendations received at the Grant Conference held at Fallen Leaf Lake, November 2001. A review team from the USDA Forest Service, BLM and input from Division consultants, all worked on the development of the sample outline. NOTE: PLEASE PROVIDE THREE' PAPER COPIES .(HARD COPIES) OF YOUR APPLICATION AND TWO COMPUTER DISKS. Applications for the 2002~03 Fiscal Year must'be post marked by June 15, 2002 for all Local Government Agencies and Winter OSV Federal Grants. All other Federal Applications must be post marked 'by July 15, 2002. Some of the key features of the sample outline include the following: · Information that is repeated each year or is provided as a separate document to OHMVR has been placed in the Attachments section. As an example, Baseline Informatio~ found in the WHPP and the monitoring reports are now in the 'Attachments Section. · Information in the 2000 OHV Grant Application Guide is now supplied in only one section. · Information is consolidated under broad categories for ease of organization: Description of OHV Opportunities; Operations, Maintenance and Administration Deliverables; Law Enforcement Activities; Conservation Activities; Detailed Cost; Environmental Documentation; Public Involvement, etc. · The level of detail and supporting materials (e.g. maps, photographs) expected in filling out the required sections in the application are articulated. For example, the Soil Loss Monitoring program should state the number of acres or miles of routes in each condition (green, yellow, and red), as shown in Attachment 3. · At the top of each section the outline provides the appropriate reference to the OAL Regulations that are posted on the web site. · Under each section is a list of the information required in that section according to the 2000 OHV Grant Application Guide. · Following all of the required Sections (I-X) there are two appendices and three attachments. The attachments are review templates showing the type of information and level of detail needed in the CEQA and WHPP sections of the application. Appendices: A- Monitoring Report B - Baseline Data Attachments: 1 - Consultant's CEQA Review Format 2 - Consultant's WHPP Review Format 3 - Sample Soils Trail Condition Rating The Application Requirement Matrix The Application Requirement Matrix (ARM) (Figure 4, 2000 OHV Grant Application Guide) is intended to help the applicant determine the content required in each type of grant application. Please note the following-important points in using the ARM: L. Grantee's who are submitting multiple grant applications (e.g. O&M grant, planning grant, equipment grant, etc.) will not be required to repeat the information. Any section that is applicable to all grants (i.e., not specific to the individual supporting grant) should be included in the O&M gra.nt but NEED NOT BE DUPLICATED in the other grants. It is only necessary to cross-reference the pages containing the information in the O&M grant. !. Examples of materials from the 2000 OHV Grant Application Guide that need to appear once: Item P Monitoring Summary Item Q Resource Discussion Item R Endangered/Threatened Species Map item S Soil Standards Map Item V Wildlife Habitat Protection Program Materials repeated from year- to- year (e.g. a discussion of resources) should be placed in appendices but not included in the .main text of the application. Copies of the 2000 OHV Grant Application Guide and OAL regulations are posted on our Web site (www.ohv.parks.ca.qov). Hard copies are available upon request via e-mail at info(~,ohv.parks.ca..qov) or by calling (916) 324-4442. SECTION I State of California -The Resources Agency' DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION Division of Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation APPLICATION FOR STATE OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE GRANT See Manual for Instmc6ons APPLICANT (Name and Address): PROJECT TITLE (4 Words ~aximum) Title: Address: City: State: Zip VEHICLE TYPE AMOUNT REQUESTED (Total Grant Amount) [] [] $ (round to $1,000) NEAREST CITY: COUNTY NUMBER (S) COST BY SUB-ACTIVITH~S (C&E): ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION (Check): Conservation $ [] Complete Enforcement TOTAL C&E $ APPLICANTS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AND CONTACT PERSONS (TYPE DO NOT ~GN) I) Authorized Representative Title Phone Number 2) Project Administration/Coordination Contact Title Phone Number PROJECT DESCRIPTION (State specifically what you will do with the requested funds) The undersigned understands and (lees hereby promise that soil survey/monitoring, wildlife habitat survey/management and OHV law enforcement program~/activities will be complete and/or implemented, as applicable, pursuant to Section 5090.53 of the Public Resources Code I certify that this project conforms with appropriate land use plans, CEQA, and all other requited environmental documentation SIGNED: Authorized Representative Only Date Section I1: DESCRIPTION OF OHV OPPORTUNITIES Items that must be included are: l) A map of the specific area or routes. 4970.10(d)(1) 2) Briefly describe the existing, legal OHV opportunity that exists within a 50-mile radius of the project area (4970.31(c)(5)), status of resources, problems, and the desired outcome or results (4970.10(d)(9)). List the number of acres available for open OHV use, miles of designated trails and roads, and open OHV areas. 3) Discuss visitor demand for the OHV opportunity. 4970.31(c)(4) 4) Discuss the types of vehicles that currently use the area. 4970.31(c)(6) 5) Discuss volunteer programs including the scope programs, number of active participants, hours volunteered, and amount of OHV funds used to run the program. (4970.31(c)(12) 6) Discuss the sustainability of the area or faCilities for long-term use. Identify any known or anticipated threats to the longevity of OHV use (e.g. endangered species, urban expansion, user conflicts, etc.). 4970.31(c)(10), 4970.21(a) MAP (Item H 2000 OHV Grant Application Guide) Appendix C includes a map identifying the specific areas/routes and facilities to be maintained under this Cooperative Agreement. This map should be contained in a separate file as hard copy, and if possible, as an electronic file in PDF format less than three megabytes. FACILITIES SCHEDULE (Item K - 2000 OHV Grant Application Guide) Schedule listing when campgrounds, staging areas, roads, and trails are open during the year. SECTION II1: OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE and ADMINISTRATIVE DELIEVERABLES Briefly describe what you are proposing to accomplish (deliverables) under operations and maintenance, and administration, with OHV funds. O&M projects are'intended for annually recurring work directed toward facilities, natural resources, visitor assistance, and visitor safety directly.attributable to OHV recreation. 4970.05(a) Operations and Maintenance Component You may want to include the following examples of the O&M activities under the Operations and 'Maintenance cost category in Section VI (Detailed Cost Summary): 4970.05(b)(1-15) below. Facility repair and servicing Volunteer use and coordination Visitor services Site administration and direct OHV program/grant administration Snow plowing Trash collection First aid equipment & supplies Map/brochure design and printing Construction of physical barriers and other means of traffic control Trail maintenance Routine visitor monitoring and visitor surveys Minor trail relocation Cultural resource mitigation/protection Purchase of tools and equipment exceeding $250. 4970.10(d)(7) and 4970.08(e) Kiosks, signboards, regulatory, and directional .signs Explain if the project will require more than I year to complete. 4970. lO(g) Administration Component Briefly discuss activities associated with the Administration cost category in Section VI (Detailed Cost Summary). OHV-related indirect costs can be included in this section and should generally not exceed 10 percent of the total O&M grant request unless justified. 4970.10(f) (Item C & D 2000 OHV Grant Application Guide) DELIVERABLES: ACTIVITIES COSTS SECTION IV: LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES Briefly describe law enforcement activities with a Law Enforcement Plan. The following activities are considered enforcement: 4970.30(g)(1-3) below Enforcement activities also consist of employing, equipping, and supervising peace officers protecting natural resources, enforcement of Division 16.5 (commencing with Section 38000) of the Vehicle Code, enforcement of Sections 4442 and 4442.5 of the Public Resources Code, and enforcement of other laws regulating the equipment and use of off-highway motor vehicles. 4970.30(a) Please See Below. Law Enforcement Plans in O&M applications will cgmply with the items found in 49'~0.10(e)(1-7). · A map that shows where significant law enforcement problems occur and the areas, routes, and corridors that will be patrolled and enforced with OHV funds. Maps may be submitted electronically and a hard copy mailed separately. · Identification of the number and classificatibn of Law Enforcement personnel involved in implementing the OHV Project and a schedule of the patrols that will be conducted (e.g., Level - 4 Law Enforceme0t OffiCer, 10 weekends, or Sergeant 10 weekends). · The number, price, and type of enforcement signs to be purchased and installed. · The cost of educational materials such as displays or brochures. · Documentation about law enforcement problems in areas identified for OHV use (as authorized by PRC 5090.50) or problems that are occurring in areas where OHV use is prohibited (as authorized by California Vehicle Code 38225). · Describe how enforcement personnel will enforce the following laws: 4970.10(e)(1) · Spark arresters · Current OHV registration. · Maximum noise level. · Prevention of illegal activity that may result in resource damage. · Prevention of trespass activity and violation of closed areas. · Driving under the influence and/or possession of open containerS. · Describe your OHV-related searCh and rescue program. 4970.10(e)(1) · List the phone number for contacting your agency 7 days per week, 24 hours per day. If your agency is not available, list alternate agencies that provide this service. 4970.10(e)(1) (Items G, N & 0 2000. OHV Grant Application Guide) Plan: 1. Map of patrol areas 2. Law enforcement Issues '~ 3. How OHV Funds will solve issues 4. Enforcement of OHV related laws including spark arresters, registration, noise, resource damage/trespass, DUI and search and 'rescue 5. Agency phone number 6. Number and classification of LE personnel 7.Schedule of patrols 8.Signs to be purchased/installed 9. Educational materials SECTION V: CONSERVATION ACTIVITIES Conservation activities are carried out for the prevention or reduction of soil loss, wildlife loss, and habitat loss as defined in PRC Sections 5090.35, 5090.50 and 5090.53. 4970.30(a) The following activities are considered conservation: 4970.30(0(1-8) ~ 1) Soil, habitat and wildlife monitoring. 2) Activities to prevent soil erosion and to repair existing soil erosion. 3) Wildlife habitat enhancement projects. 4) Aerial photography. 5) Wildlife, habitat, and soil studies. 6) Temporary closure of trails or areas or closure and rehabilitation of unauthorized trails and trails not in compliance wi~ PRC 5090.35(d and e). 7) Reduction of dust related to OHV recreation. 8) Reduction or prevention of siltation related to OHV recreation into streams. Briefly describe your Wildlife Habitat Protection Program (WHPP). Federal agenCies shall amend their WHPPs. each year as needed. The WHPP must have the following information pursuant to 4970.31 (c) and 4970.13(c) Plant and Wildlife Component of the WHPP Include the following in the plant and wildlife section of your. WHPP. · A map identifying the traiis, roads, ~;orrid0rs, and areas that are open for use by OHVs and receive funding from the OHV Fund (See Item B). · A baseline survey and brief description of the threatened, endangered, and sensitive plants and wildlife, and wildlife habitats, found in the area that is open for OHV use. For this baseline survey, include: map showing the extent of habitat for State or Federally designated Threaten, Endangered and Sensitive plant and wildlife species within or immediately adjacent to your OHV areas. 4970.10(d)(10) · A monitoring program for Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive (TES) plants and.wildlife that will: · Assist in sustaining viable species composition; on the lands within their jurisdiction, grantees shall identify and monitor endangered, threatened, and other species of concern that are identified by the management agency, consistent with current laws and policies within the areas maintained and managed with OHV Grant Program Funds. · Identify current plant and wildlife management objectives for the OHV area. · Identify monitoring activities. · Identify monitoring protocols. · A resource protection program describing management actions that will assist in sustaining species composition within the OHV area. Examples of these kind of actions include law enforcement, signing, barriers, limited operating pedods, temporary closures, and educational brochures and/or displays. · A description of the management review process, the staff that is included, what documents and monitoring data were reviewed, and what changes, if any, the agency made in their WHPP due to this review process. 8 Soil Component of the WHPP Include the following: 1 · A baseline survey of the soils found in the area that is open for OHV use. · A map that identifies the types of soil and their erosion potential in OHV areas. 4970.10(d)(11). A map could have the roads and trails overlay on the soils types. · A soil monitoring program that will: · Meet the State approved soil standards ;ind detect accelerated and unnatural erosion. · Identify current soil management objectives for the OHV area. · Identify soil-monitoring activities. · Identify monitoring protocols. · ^ resource protection program describing management actions to prevent unacceptable soil loss. Examples of these management actions include routine maintenance and drainage repairs, .law enforcement, signing, barriers, limited operating pedods, temporary closures, site rehabilitation, and educational brochures and/or displays. Include your guidelines for heavy equipment operation. Describe what will happen to erosion control devices such as rolling dips with the use of heavy equipment. · A management component that used theabove information to resolve resource issues. · Include a list of all roads, trails, corridors, and areas that are not in compliance with the soil standards and a plan and timeline to bring them into compliance. (Item N, O, P, Q, R, S, T & V2000 OHV Grant Application Guide) WILDLIFE HABITAT.PROTECTION PROGRAM. Program Components l) Maps 2) Baseline survey 3) Monitoring program 4) Management objectives 5) Resource protection program 6) Management component (Review and Action) 7) Soil Loss Plan and schedule (A plan and schedule for bringing Red & Yellow roads and trails into compliance with soil loss standards.) SECTION VI: DETAILED COST SUMMARY 4970.10(d)(2), 4970.30(c)(1-2) Complete the Cost Summary and the detailed cost estimates for each activity for each sub-unit. If this request amount is great is greater than last year's funding, identify what the additional funds are for and provide a detailed justification. Identify the priority of this O&M application for funding in comparison with the other applications that,you may be s.u, bmitting. tO SECTION VI EXAMPL__; O & M DETAILED COST ESTIMATE PROJECT NAME: ' A. OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE 1) STAFF Salary Term/Days Total Cost FS Contributed Grant Recluest 2) CONTRACTS Freg~uency Total Cost FS Contributed Annual Cost 3) MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT Annual Cost Subtotal Operations & Maintenance B. LAW ENFORCEMENT 1) STAFF * Salary Term/Days Total Cost .FS Contributed Grant Recluest Subtotal Law Enforcement C. CONSERVATION 1) PLANT & WlLDLiFI~ SECTION OF WHPP Salary Term/Days Total Cost FS Contributed Grant Recluest 2) SOIL SECTION OF WHPP Subtotal Conservation TOtal A, B, C D. INDIRECT ADMIN. (10% or less) TOTAL Grant Request TOTAL ROUNDED t! . COST SUMMARY 2002/2003 ~Costs by Unit District~ I Expenditure Type Supervisor's Office Unit A. Unit B Unit C Staff $5,328. $23,526 $32,212 . $43,556 Contracts & Services $ 0 $ 1,200 $ 500 $ 2,000 Materials & Supplies $ 2,000 $ 3.300 $ 4,250 $ 9,250 Vehicles $1,000 $ 500 $ 2,500 $ 2,500 Equipment $ 0 $1,000 $ 300 $ 900 .[ SUBTOTAL $ 8,328 $29,526 $38,462 $ 58,206 --Administration.(10%) $ 832. $ 2,752 $ 2,946. $ 5,820 TOTAL[] $ 9,160 $32,297 $41,468 $64,027 I Total Request (Rounded) $ 9,000 $30,000 $41,000 $64,000 ~OTAL REQUEST [] $146,00q Agency Contribution [] $1,282 $ 5,725 $ 6,15t $48,250 ~GENCY TOTAL [] $25,21~1 Previous'Year's Request = $ 5,000 $23,400 $25,450 $48,250 Previous Year's Request Total = $102,100 Last Year~s Allocation [] $101,000 12 PROJECT EXTENSION JUSTIFICATION (ttem F 2000 OHV Grant Application Guide) FUNDING AND PHASING PRIORITIES (Item 1-2000 OHV Grant Application Guide) If submitting more than one application, indicate desired priority for funding. SECTION VII: ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION 4970. 2, 4970.'13(a, b), 4970.31(c)(9) Applications shall include the appropriate environmental documentation with regard to compliance With NEPA and CEQA requirements. 4970.09(h) Documentation for categorical exemptions under CEQA must also include the following pursuant to the 2001 CEQA Guidelines, PRC Section 21000; Article 19, 15300.2 1)' An evaluation of the impacts of this project on wetlands, navigable waters, and sensitive habitats (including TES). 2) The cumulative effects of other projects that have been conducted in the OHV funded areas when completing the environmental documentation in compliance with NEPA and CEQA. (4970.14(a)). Refer to the cumulative effects discussion in your Environmental Impact Statement or Report, and land management plan 3) The possibility that the proposed activities will have a significant effect on the environment due to' unusual circumstances such as steep slopes or highly erodable soil. 4) The potential damage~to scenic resources within the view shed of a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. 5) The proposed project area has been listed as producing hazardous materials (Cortese ' list). 6) Substantially adyerse changes in the significance of historical or cultural resources. Incorporate by reference from CEQA those items that are clearly exempt. Group the major activities into CEQA Exemption Categories (Attachment 1). Document compliance with. your land management plan. 4970.10(d)(6) (If NEPA/CEQA control language is required, address here.) The following control language from 'the OHV Commission (10/01) applies to NEPA for winter applications. "Document the information used in the NEPA analysis such as area assessments, heritage evaluations, biological evaluations/assessments, other scientific reviews, viSitor survey data, etc. 14 OHV Grant Funded Activities and ,CEQA Categorical Ex,empt~ons (See Attachment C for an exampl~ °fCEOA categ0des. ~(Item J 2000 OHV Grant Application Guide) Item 1 - Evaluation of the impact of this project on wetlands, navigable waters; and sensitive habitats. Item 2 - Existing or potential cumulative impacts, if any, of this project being completed in the same place over several years. Item 3 - The possibility that the proposed activities will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.such as steep slopes or highly erodable soil. Item 4 - The potential damage to scenic resources within the view shed of a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. Item 5 - The proposed project area listing as producing hazardous materials (Cortese list). Item 6 - Substantially adverse changes in the significance of historical or cultural resources. SECTION VIII: PUBLIC INVOLVMENT Applications shall be made available by the appliCant for public review and comment prior to submission of the application to the OHMVR Division for consideration. 4970.09(g) · Describe your public involvement efforts including letters, phone calls, web. notices, and meetings, etc. · List the date, time, and location and attendance of the public meetings that you held to discuss your application. · Describe your efforts to publicize the meeting. List the groups that were invited · Summarize the comments that were made at the meeting. · Explain any changes that you made to your application as a result of your public meetings. · Include all letters of support and opposition. 4970.31(c)(3) (Item E- 2000 OHV Grant Application Guide) CONFLICTS/INVESTIGATIONS OF IMPACTS (Item J. 2000 OHV Grant Application Guide) (If control langUage is required, address here.) SECTION IX: PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS REPORTS ' (PARS) ... 4970.11, 4970.31(c)('1) All applicants that were awarded an OHV Grant or Cooperative Agreement last year must complete the PAR. Section VII. Describe what was accomplished with OHV funds. 4970.28(a) 17 Project Accomplishment Report I. OHV Oppomuni~ Acres of l~d available for O~ ~d OSV recreation Acres of l~d available for ~ails o~y OHV recreation Acres of l~d available for open O~ recreation. Miles of motorcycle ~ail Miles of ATV ~ail Miles of 4 wheel ~ve routes~.~.~ Miles of level 2 ~e roads Total roles OHV routes Acres available for open sno~obfle use Miles of groomed sno~obile routes Miles of ~oomed snb~obile routes Miles of ~rked sno~obile mutes Total miles of OSV romes II. Conse~ation activities 1. ,Miles of OHV routes repaked. 2. Miles of vol~teer routes closed ~d rehabilitmed. 3. Acres of"open" l~d closed ~d rehabilitated. III. Volunteer information 1 Vol~teer ho~ contributed. 2. Est~ated value of vol~teer labor IV. Visitor assistance information 1. Number of OHV visitors (any portion of a ~y is one visito0 2. Total nmber of OHV visitors comacte~sisted 3. Number of OHV inj~ accidents 4. Number of OHV related htalities V. Law Enforcement Citations W~gs ~ests Compli~ce g Contacts . Registmt~n Sp~k a~ester Noise Resomce dmage Trespass on private l~ds Wilderness Mtmsions Other: explain below Toul 18 RAT' .... ~' ~ '~ ~REPORT ON DELIVERABLES NAR IVE WiTH PROJECT AC~cOMpLISHMENT SECTION X: EQUIPMENT INVENTORY All applicants who have purchased equipment with OHV funds must list the vehicles' status. Vehicles that are to be surveyed (replaced) must be identified. Applicant must identify what will happen to the funds when that vehicle is sold. (Appendix K - 2000 OHV Grant Application Guide) INVENTORY OF OHV PURCHASED EQUIPMENT (Update each year for all mobile equipment, purchased with OHV Funds.) (e.g,. snowmobiles, ATV's, motorcycle, groomers, trucks, and trail tractors) List by District: Make Model Year VINIID. No. Miles Hours 2O ITEMS THAT. MAY NOT, NEED TO, BE INCLUDED Item M: Governing Body Resolution Local Agencies must include their Governing Body Resolution here. If possible, insert an electronic coPy in the application and send an original to the OHMVR Division. NOTE: The items below are required for Federal agencies applying for: Planning, Acquisition, and Development Grants. Local agencies may omit these items from the application. Item U: Inventory of Features Item X: Initial Investigation of Impacts Item Y: Initial Investigation of OHV impacts on Water Quality Item W~ Toxic or Hazardous Site Survey (Example) A Governing Body Resolution Item M, Inventory of Feature Item U, Initial Investigation of Impacts Item X, Initial Investigation of OHV Impact on Water Quality Item Y, and the Toxic or Hazardous Site Survey Item W are not required for Federal O&M Cooperative Applications. 21 *_.APPENDIX A MONITOmNG REPORT Include your annual monitoring report in~ this section. 4970.10(d)(8), 4970.13(c)($)(A), and 4970.31(c)(8) (Item N, O,* P, Q, R, S, T 8, V- 2000 'OHV Grant Application Guide) The Annual Monitoring Report for the prior year must be included in Appendix A. APPENDIX B BASELINE DATA Soils' '*' Wildlife 23 ATTACHMENT #1 CONSULTANT'S CEO. A REVIEW FORMAT Categorical ExemPtion (CE) Justification Template The Division requests that the following format be used. 1. Save Template with your filename of the specific grant appl!cation under the \NorCal2001\grantappreview\ subdirectory. E.g. if you're reviewing Redding O&M, then save the file as \NorCal2001\grantappreview\ReddingO&M. 2. Remove the rows in this template that don't apply to your specific grant application. 3. Be as specific as possible in describing why the activities are exempt, or appear not to be exempt. See below for more instruction. Typical CE Examples of Examples of Why activity is exempt categories Activity(les) Applied for Note: These evaluations should explain in layman's terms why an activity would be considered de minimis (e.g. small in lineal extent, gentle to the environment etc.) If there is contradictory information in the application that' seems to suggest the activity may not be exempt then this should be stated as-"Problem..." 15061 (b) (3) No Coordination and Instructions: State what the grant application is significant effect monitoring for-e.g. "staff person(s) to establish a needs assessment and policy recommendations for monitoring of _~" Example of a good evaluation: "Installation of 8 to 10 small "You are Here" signs at major route junctions that incorporate a portin of the OHV map to orient users". 24 Typical CE Examples of Examples of Why activity is exempt categories Activity(les) Applied for 15301 Existing Facilities Instructions: State what specific facilities facilities maintenance - maintenance is listed in the application, and how maintenance maintenance and they proposed to do it [hand and/or mechanical]. signing of routes State mileage of routes to be maintained, and if there are no mileages, state that 'no mileages of routes were given in the application". Example of a good evaluation: Facilities maintenance includes cleaning restrooms, infrastructure road maintenance, camp and staging area cleanup. Twelve miles of infrastructure road were done in past. This is being increased to 27 miles with "other trails as needed"'. Trail maintenance is done with hand tools. (p. 5 and 6) except where heavy use requires as small dozer or front loader. The impacts and cumulative effects were covered in an Open Area Management Plan and a USFWS Biological Opinion. Example of a Problem: Reconstructing one silt dam in the Divide Peak OHV area (wetlands ~nvolved?? need more description). 15304 Mihor common activities Instructions: Most of the grant applications alterations to land include: we've seen state the "total maintenance actions" Fence repair, road and "specific maintenance actions". List both repair and here. If they aren't specific, state that "no resurfacing, and/or specifics were listed." Rehabilitation of Example of a good evaluation: Actions will areas of illegal use include installing closure signs or barders where illegal use has occurred. If new tracks are discovered, they will be hidden or blocked, such as adding a barrier, with little or no ground disturbance. Example of a "Problem": Repair, resurface, or harden 20 miles of vehicle roads in the Jawbone- Butterbredt ACEC and Rand Mountains. Installing erosion control structures or other corrective actions to minimize soil erosion and runoff. [unknown as to type of "hardening" material used, or if 20 miles of roads will be hardened. Unknown existing condition of erosion control structures, size of structures and quantity, and unknown how structures will be repaired 2.5 Typical CE Examples of Examples of Why activity is exempt categories Activity(les) Applied for 15304 (d) common activities Instructions: Most of the grant applications Environmental include: route we've seen state "as part of the WHPP, soil, benefit restoration, and/or wildlife habitat and stream crossings will be conservation and monitored by trained agericy personnel following monitoring state checklists", Application should give some indication of following established protocol. If 'not, state that "no protocol was listed." Example of a good evaluation: Route armoring, tread repair, grooming of designated trails to prevent and control soil erosion, vegetation loss, and trail widening. Maintenance work at two staging areas is proposed. A trail doZer will be used to establish erosion contrOl and maintain tread. Use .of _mechanized equipment at Cactus Flats is limited to reshaping and recontouring the staging area. The project as a whole will reduce the effects of gully erosion which will prevent any damage to adjacent T&E plant habitat. Ha~,dening of the stream crossings on 2W01 (Devil's Hole) and 2E43 (Hixon-Bautista) with a. 9ravel base are proposed to prevent impact to the southwestern arroyo toad and downstream sedimentation. Monitoring for effects of OHV use on soils, resources T&E species, stream crossings, wildlife habitat and visitor use levels. Restoration activities include stabilization, revegetation and disguise of vehicle tacks and traces on unauthorized routes using local vegetation and hand tools. Disguise access points with boulders and downed logs, reseeding or replanting as needed and posting informational signs .to prevent further ORV use. 15306. Information Resource inventory, This one is straightforward-no explanation Collection surveys on portions needed. of trails for the Example of a good evaluation: Proposed purpose of activities such as field and records review, preparing Biological development of context materials, and Evaluationss and/or incorporating records into GIS themes would not Archaeological have a physical effect on the environment. Evaluations Typical CE Examples of EXamples of WhY*activity is exempt ....... categories Activity(les) Applied for · -. 15378 not a law enforcement, This One is straightforward-no explanation project money for planning needed. State that the project is law staff tasks enforcement only, or hidng of staff only etc. Item G Exceptions The answers to each of the 6 'extraordinary NOTE: These circumstances" questions should be all in the "exceptions" are negative because a positive response would extraordinary mean the activity is not categorically exempt. circumstances, The answers in the application should have as defined by the enough detail so that you, the reader, can CEQA and determine if these answers are correct, similar to .OHMVR an Initial Study checklist. If the answer mentions guidelines, that the words 'impacts" or 'adverse impacts" or would make the 'mitigation", then this is a red-flag that the activity activity not probably isn't exempt. categorically exempt 2.7 Typical CE Examples of Examples of Why activitY is exempt categories Activity(les) '.. Applied for Unfortunately, most of the grant applications just * repeat the question and answer it negatively...so you will have to go through the document to find the more information to complete the evaluation. Here are the listings: Wetlands, sensitive habitats, T&E: Does the grant application mention wetlands? Does it list T&E habitats? Does it. state that T&E habitats will be protected, and if so, how? Cumulative effects: Does the application address the impacts of carrying out the activity in the same place over several years? Do we think that effects are cumulatively significant? Steep slopes, erodable soils: Do they state that they will use the 1991 Soil Conservation protocol? Does it state that the activities in the grant will occur in erodable or steep soil areas? If so, how will the activities that are carded out in the area avoid impacts? State scenic highway: Are there any in the area of the activities? This is where those maps come in handy, because you're going to have to look at the maps and determine where the state scenic highways are. If there is no information regarding state scenic highways, state that. Hazardous materials: Does the application state that there are any listings? Should state that the "Cortese List" has been reviewed to verify that no activities from this grant will be located on a site on this list. Historic or cultural resources: Does it state provisions for activities to evaluate and protect cultural resources, if found? Should no~t include mitigation measures, but should reference Best Management Practices commonly used to avoid impacts. 28 Typical CE ..... Exan~ples of Examples' of Why activity is exempt categories Activ~ity(ies) .. . Applied*for" "' .. '* Not CE (Initial e.g. Facility Example of Problem making activity appear Study/Neg Dec Maintenance not CE: Problem: Project summary states may be required) route/trail maintenance and emergency These are .... rehabilitation will be provided. There is no explanations of description in any part of the application of the the work in the type of maintenance activities Or rehabilitation application work to be provided. Thereis no discussion of OTHER THAN maintenance methods or size of area affected. the Item G 500 miles of trails is going to be monitored for "Extraordinary soils. How many miles of trail require Circumstances" maintenance? There is internal inconsistency discussions that .... about the use of heavy equipment. Items C and make the work H report the proposed use of heavy equipment. seem larger than Item G says heavy equipment will not be used. de minimus or The specific piece of heavy equipment to be not CE for other used or its purpose is not identified. The reasons, statement in Item G that no ground disturbing activities are proposed conflicts with statement in Item C (Grant Proposal)that proposal includes trail work, erosion control, sign installation and repair. There is insufficient information provided 'to conclude that the proposed activities are exempt. 29 ATTACHMENT #2 CONSULTANT'S WHHP REVIEW FoRMAT';ii:ii WHPP TEMPLATE ~IPP Assessment of Regulatory Compliance Please note the new terms "Documentation Provided" and ."Documentation Needed." Additionally, where the WHPP is unclear, the Division would like us to say "Clarification Needed, "as opposed to the previous terms. Please also use the term special-status species rather than T&E or other such terms. Item E Applicant, Project: WHPPs must have the following: BLM, XX Field Office--Project name USFS, XX Ranger District--Project name A map identifying the trails, roads, corridors, and areas that The regulations are clear. The map has to be specific enough are open for use by OHVs and receive funding from the to show the actual riding area~. ,4 general map of the forest is OHV fund. not adequate. Documentation Provided. The map shows trails, roads, corridors, and areas that are open for use by OHVs. Documentation Needed. The map provided shows the entire forest but does not show which roads, trails, or other areas open to riding. 3O Item E ......... Applicant, Project: " WHPPs must have the following: BLM, XX Field Office--Project name USFS, XX Ranger District--Project t~ame The WHPP should at least provide the results of surveys to- A baseline survey 'of the soils, sensitive wildlife, and date, even if the analysis and coverage of the surveys are wildlife habitats found in the area that is open for use by limited. For just this year, if little has been completed, it's ok OHVs and receives funding from the OHV fund. as long as the WHPP is clear about what has been done and what will be done in the future. If the WHPP mentions that surveys have been conducted for a particular species but then provides no information about the results of any of those surveys, it's incomplete. One inadequate discussion out of many that are ok should not be a fail, but where no attempt is made to provide information, the WHPP is incomplete. The WHPP should summarize reference documents, as necessary. Soils: Documentation Provided. The WHPP describes which baseline soils surveys have been conducted to-date and the results of those surveys. Soils: Documentation Needed. No baseline soils survey information is provided even though at least some soils monitoring has occurred in the Jawbone Canyon/Dove Spring OHV Open Area. Please describe which baseline soils surveys have been conducted to-date and the results of those surveys. Please note that if the applicant solely relies on the State of California Habitat and Stream Checklists, it is not good enough for wildlife monitoring. Wildlife and Habitats: Documentation Provided. The WHPP describes which baseline wildlife surveys have been conducted to-date and provides the results of those wildlife surveys. The WHPP should be improved in 2002/2003 by including at least the following information: * The WHPP should describe the current status of the greater long-necked woodpecker and/or its habitat in the grant- funded OHV area, as it appears some information is available. · Provide a table describing all special-status species reviewed for inclusion in the monitoring program. The table should describe the reason why or why not each species is included and list the monitoring priority, if any (i.e., which species are top priority for monitoring). Wildlife and Habitats: Documentation Needed. Does not provide baseline status ora single plant or wildlife species or its habitat in OHV areas. The WHPP needs to describe the existing knowledge baseline so the progress of the monitoring can be assessed. Examples: · The WHPP needs to describe what and where surveys have been completed to-date. · The WHPP should describe the current status of all of the special-status species and/or their habitats in the grant- funded OHV area where that information is known. · The WHPP should be able to describe progress made toward establishing the baseline in the possible future Chemehuevi Wash open area. 31 Item E ] Applicant, Project: · · WHPPs must have the following: [ BLM, XX Field Office--Project nam.e [ USFS, XX Ranger DistrictmPmject name A monitoring program: 1. A soil erosion monitoring program that meets the soil Basically, we're looking for evidence of their gameplan. I.e., standards. How do the~. determine what to monitor and when? The '~complete" example included here was for a program that was CCR § 4970.13(c)(3a): The program shall be able to detect just getting off the ground, but the bulleted items describe the accelerated and unnatural erosion in the area that is open for gist of what we're looking for in most erosion monitoring use by OHVs and is maintained and managed with OHV programs. It's ok (and perhaps preferable) for the WI-IPP to funds, refer the reviewer to Item F for an actual listing of out-of- compliance trails. Documentation Provided. The WHPP provides only the most basic information about the soils monitoring program, which is still in development. The concept of using controls in the monitoring program is noteworthy as is the proposal to monitor hazardous materials. The WHPP should be improved in 2002/2003 by including at least the following information: · Describe criteria for determining which trail segments or areas should be monitored and when..Rank priority areas. E.g., Perhaps some areas warrant more frequent monitoring than others. · Describe which trails have been monitored to-date. . _ · Describe any soil monitoring protocols or standards used to supplement the 1991 Guidelines, if any. Documentation Needed. Although the WHPP indicates that soils monitoring has been conducted for two years, the WHPP does not describe the results of the monitoring. This information should be provided. Additionally, the WHPP should be improved in 2002/2003 by including at least the following additional information: · Describe criteria for determining which trail segments or areas should be monitored and when. Rank priority areas. E.g., Perhaps some areas warrant more frequent monitoring than others. · Describe any soil monitoring protocols or standards used to supplement the 1991 Guidelines, if an),. 32 Item E Applicant, Project: WHPPs must have the following: BLM, XX Field Office--Project name USFS, XX Ranger District--Project name 2. A monitoring program for threatened, endangered, or As we have discussed, monitoring is a work in progress, so we sensitive plants or wildlife, are going to be somewhat flexible, within reason, in assessing the WHPP's special-status species monitoring program. The CCR § 4970.13(c)(3a): The program shall be able to detect "complete" example is from a WHPP where the program is the loss of wildlife habitat in the area that is open for use by just getting going. B/here a program has already been in OHVs and is maintained and managed with OHV funds, progress for a few years, we should look for at least some of the bulleted items to be included. Although we can't expect all [note that OHV recognizes that every s-s sp. can't be the WHPPs to address all of the bulleted items, we can include monitored. USFS/BLM biologists should show the analysis them as recommendations for next year. The second for which spp. should be monitored. J "complete" example is from a more developed program. It should be expanded with recommendations for next year, if you have any. Documentation Provided. The WHPP describes the methodology currently utilized for special-status plants and wildlife.. The WHPP should be improved in 2002/2003 by including at least the following information: · Give assessment criteria, to the extent they have been developed. · The WHPP should describe the "route of travel" monitoring method (e.g., describe methodology). · The list of priority species is fairly extensive. The WHPP should include a list of all special-status species considered and describe the priority and rationale for monitoring. Species under consideration should not be limited to state or _ federally listed species. · Describe the progress made to-date. E.g., What portion of OHV grant-funded areas have been monitored? For which species has monitoring commenced? · Describe priorities for monitoring areas. · The text states that the CDCA Plan and other subregional plans and management plans contain general monitoring guidance. The WHPP should provide some summary information or specific references to these materials. Documentation Provided. The status of special-status species on District lands is reported based on GIS modeling, analysis, and/or field surveys. The monitoring program is thorough and includes methodology, species status, and action plans for specific species. Documentation Needed. Although the WHPP states that the District has been conducting monitoring of OHV impacts since 1999, the WHPP does not describe the program. The WHPP needs to provide: · A description of what portion of the OHV grant-funded areas have been monitored. · Assessment criteria (as they currently exist). · An explanation of which species are part of the monitoring program and why. · A timeframe for the monitoring program. 33 Item E Applicant, Project: WHPPs must have the following: BLM, XX Field Office--Project name USFS, XX Ranger District--Project name 3. A monitoring program that will provide sufficient The first "complete" example is from a WHPP where the information so that management can modify the WHPP in program i~ j~t getting going. Where a program hctg already order to assure that the area sustains a viable species been in £rogress for a few year& we shouM look for at lea~t composition, some of the item~ to be included. Although we can't expect all the WHPPs to address all of the bulleted items, we should CCR § 4970.13(c)(3c): The WHPP shall specify include them as recommendation.~ for next year. The second management objectives for protecting identified species and "complete" example is from a more develo£ed program. It their associated habitats. Utilizing the information gathered shouM be expanded with even more recommendation.~ for next via the monitoring of these species and their associated year, ifyou have any. habitats, the grantees shall evaluate and accordingly modify the management processes of the program. Grantees shall Do.cumentation Provided. The program appears to be in development. The WHPP should be improved in 2002/2003 discuss within the annual monitoring program report the by including at least the following information: changes to the WHPP that wereimplemented as a resultof this adaptive management process. * Describe the staging area standards that are currently under development. · Describe the results of any monitoring conducted to-date (at least some monitoring has been conducted) and any conclusions drawn. · Show the areas that are being monitored. · Describe the "unacceptable" rates of change, the identification of which is described in the WHPP as objective of the habitat monitoring. · Describe how the results are evaluated and what, if any, management changes are proposed as a result of monitoring. Documentation Provided. The monitoring program includes effectiveness monitoring to determine the effectiveness of avoidance and minimization measures on special-status species and sensitive habitat. Corrective action will be taken when avoidance or minimization measures are found to be ineffective. For 2002/2003, the WHPP should describe whether any corrective action was taken as a result of monitoring. Documentation Needed. Although the WHPP states that the District has been conducting monitoring of OHV impacts since 1999, the WHPP does not describe-any program goals or any results or actions taken as a result of the program. The WHPP needs to provide: · The results of any monitoring conducted to-date (at least some monitoring has been conducted) and any conclusions drawn. · Describe how the results are evaluated and what, if any, management ehanl~es are proposed as a result of monitoring. 4. Identify management objectives for the OHV area. Documentation Provided. The WHPP provides management CCR § 4970.13(¢)(3c): The WHPP shall specify objectives based on the 1989 Greater Jawbone Area. ~ Management Plan. These objectives should be updated once management objectives for protecting identified species and the Jawbone Canyon Management Plan is completed. their associated habitats. Documentation Needed. The WHPP does not identify management objectives for soils or special-status species and their habitats. 34 Item E Applicant, Project: WHPPs must have the following: BLM, XX Field Office--Project name USFS, XX Ranger District--Project name A resource protection program. Examples include law Please note that the OHVDivision wants the RPP to enforcement, signing, barriers, limited operating periods, specifically describe the problems that the RPP is addressing. temporary closures, and educational brochures and/or displays. Documentation Provided. The RPP specifies the problems that are being addressed by the RPP. The WHPP should be CCR § 4970.13(c)(4) improved in 2002/2003 by including at least the following information: * Describe how the signs, brochures and field displays, educational visitor contacts, and law enforcement each address the specific issues identified. * Describe specific evidence of success (or failure) of the RPP. ' Documentation Needed. The methods used to provide resource protection in the planning area are not described. · Describe specifically how the RPP is addressing problems identified in the WHPP, e.g., road proliferation. · Describe specific issues addressed by signs, brochures and field displays, educational visitor contacts, and law enforcement. · Describe specific evidence of success (or failure) of the RPP. Documentation Provided. The WHPP describes the basics of A description of the management review process, the staff the management review process. The WHPP should be that is included, what documents are reviewed, and what changeg the agency'made in their WHPP due to this review improved in 2002/2003 by describing how the District uses monitori0g 4ata to adjust management of resources. Describe: process.. · the process by which the District identifies issues such as CCR § 4970.13(c)(5):' Use the above information to resolve adverse OHV effects on resources resource issues. * resource issues that have been identified, if any, [This section should show that somebody is looking at the · the process for addressing those issues, and monitoring results, assessing them, and making'adjustments · what changes have been made to address the issues. based on the findings.] Documentation Needed. Although the WHPP discussed issues identified by monitoring, the WHPP does not describe any process for reviewing the results or implementing changes to address problems. Note that the regs. require a timeline, net just a list of what's A list [or map] of all roads, trails, corridors, and areas that out of compliance. Mileage is not required at this time, but we are not in compliance with the soil standards and a plan to should request the info. for nextyear. bring them into compliance. (This information has been moved re Item F. Soil Conserx;ation Activities.~ Documentation Provided. The WHPP includes a plan that CCR § 4970.13(c)(6): Include a plan that identifies the identifies the roads and trails that need to be repaired, roads and trails to be repaired, relocated, or closed with a relocated, or closed with a timeline when the projects are timeline when the projects are expected to be completed. A expected to be completed. The WHPP should be improved for report on thc status of the implementation plan shall be 2002/2003 by providing the mileage or acreage of the yellow included with the annual monitoring program report, and green areas. Documentation Needed. Although the WHPP includes a list of trails that are out of compliance and their mileage, it does not provide a timeline for repair, relocation, or closures. 35 Item E Applicant, Pro]m: WHPPs must have the following: 'BLM, XX Field Office--Project mime USFS, XX Ranger District--Project A summary of last year's monitoring program. (Do not Documentation Provided. The WHPP summarizes the send in your checklists. Summarize the monitoring that you monitoring that was conducted, the results obtained, and the did and the conclusions that you reached based on the ~ conclusions that' were reached. monitoring data.) Documentation Needed. Basically no summary is provided of any monitoring conducted in 200 I. The text indicates that at least some monitoring did occur (e.g., Sawbone Canyon/Dove Spring Open Area) but no summary of results is provided. 36 ATTACHEMENT 3 SAMPLE TRAIL CONDITION RATING Soils: The unit completed a checklist to identify cOmpliant/non-compliant trails on designated OHV routes. The following is a summary of the checklists completed: Trail Name I Miles Rating Seg. Length Results 1] 1.50 Yellow 5 seg. 3,585 ftrutting 22 0.95 Yellow 1 seg. 54 ft rutting 55 2.75 Red 11 seg. 3,824 rutting, drainage Yellow ft 6 2.80 Yellow 5 seg. 1,178 ftb.rushing, rutting, drainage 34 1.30 Red 11' seg. 4,580 rutting, brushing Yellow ft 69 1.50 Red 6 seg. 4,619 ftdrainage, rutting Yellow 74 1.20 Green 35 2.50 Red 13 seg. 5,764 . drainage, rutting Yellow ft 66 2.8 Green ~" 99 1.30 Green 14 ~ 0.91 Yellow 3 seg. 440 ft washout, rutting, drainage 10 0.98 Yellow 1 seg. 593 ft rutting, drainage 13 1.56 Yellow 4 seg. 633 ft rutting, drainage 3 13 Not will survey this season rated 4 8 ' Not will survey this season rated 7 10 Not will survey this season rated 8 13 Not will survey this season rated 3? March 21,2002 Dear Grant Applicant: Over the last several months the Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation (OHMVR) Division has been working with the United States Forest Service (USFS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and county agencies to improve the grant application process. Many of the suggestions-and improvements were a result of the Fallen Leaf Lake Grant Writing Workshop. After extensive review and discussion, the grant application process has been modified to create a more simplified and streamlined application. The 2000/01-gr~n-t application and guidelines will be used for the 2002/03-grant application cycle. A sample grant format' showing how to organize your application along with copies of the regulations and the 2000/01 guide will be posted on the OHMVR website at www.ohv.parks.ca..qov. If you would like a hard copy of the procedural guidelines and/or sample grant format, contact the OHMVR Division at (916) 324-4442. Deadlines for the 2002/2003-grant cycle are: June 15, 2002 Winter (OSV) and Local Agency Grants July 15, 2002 Federal Grants: Including Summer (OHV) Forest Service and BLM Grants, and Summer County Grants . October 1, 2002 RecreationatTrails Program Grant administrators will be assigned as follows: Barry Jones Winter OSV Program (916) 323-0954 biones~parks.ca.~ov Lowell Landowski BLM and Local Agencies (916) 324-2350 Iland~parks .ca .nov Lisa R. McClung Forest Service and Northern CA Sheriffs (916) 445-2721 Imccl('~.Darks.ca..qov We appreciate your patience with this process and wish you success in writing your 2002/2003 applications. Sincerely, - -- David L. Widell, Deputy Director California State Parks Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Division APPLICATION PROCEDURES Introduction Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Grant Applications are accepted annually. The Projected Annual Application Schedule (Figure 3) identifies the critical dates and timing of the process. This guide is designed to assist both local and federal government agencies in applying for State funds available, through the California (OHV) Grants Program.' There are some minor limitations, procedures, and legal requirements that vary between agencies and are so noted. The OHV Grants Program is intended to SUPPLEMENT an agency's existing OHV program budget. Federal agencies have existing commitments/appropriations for OHV management. Local agencies h_ave O'HV License Fee In-Lieu Tax Apportionment's and possibly revenues generated at existing OHV sites. Those funds are not to be SUPPLANTED by OHV grant funds. FIRST - Read the descriptions for the Primary Project Type Categories (Appendix A) thoroughly! Pay close attention to. any identified "Special Application Requirements". SECOND - Refer to the Application Requirements Matrix (Figure 4) so that you understand the contents of a complet~ apPlication for the type of grant you will apply for. THIRD - Review the General Application Requirements on the following page. These requirements are very important! FOURTH - Begin to prepare each application component as directed. Remember that a clear and concise "quality" application will add greatly to its potential for funding approval. The OHMVR Commission, OHMVR Division staff, OHV users and organizations, other special interest organizations, and the California Department of Fish and Game pass judgment on each application. The harder it is to understand an application the higher the likelihood that funding will be denied. General Application Requirements The following are required of all applications, regardless of the type of project or the agency applying. Failure to comply with these general requirements will be cause for your application to be rejected. 1. SUBMIT TWO COMPLETE COPIES OF THE FORMAL APPLICATION. Include a floppy disk if you have one. (If a floppy disk is submitted, indicate what programs have been used, (e.g., Word Perfect, Excel, etc.) and version of the program, (e.g., Microsoft Word Version 5.0, etc.). 2. Entitle and number each component (i.e., "Item") as we_have it identified. If you omit a "required" component, state the reason why and identify when it will be submitted. Do not include "as applicable" components unless they are applicable (see the instructions for each component). 9 FIGURE 3 OHV GRANT FUNDING CYCLE* Date Required Action " March The State must receive a "Formal" and "Complete" application by March 1 at 5p.m. (PST) April Copies of the grant applications are provided to the OHMVR Commission, OHV organizations, California Department of Fish 'and Game, and interested parties. May OHMVR Division funding recommendations sent to grant applicants, the OHMVR Commission, OHV organizations and interested parties June T. he OHMVR commission's Grants Committee holds one or more public hearing(s). July The OHMVR Commission's Grants Committee funding recommendations are provided to the applicants along with information on the upcoming OHMVR Commission Meeting/he. aring. July The OHMVR Commission approves projects at their regular meeting in mid to late July. August The California Department of P.arks and Recreation submits the selected grant projects for inclusion in the followin.q year's State BudRet Bill. September Applicants are advised of the grant funding levels. Next July The grant projects are approved by the Legislature and the Governor signs the Budget Bill. August The DPR executes a Project Agreement with the applicants. *Division may modify the Funding Cycle to meet the needs of the Department. 10 3. Compose the application to fit on 8~ X 11 paper, single sided and in black and white (if not on disk). 4. Unless a justification is provided, you can only request funding for a project that will be ,completed within the fiscal year in which the funds will be budgeted. Federal agencies can utilize their related Fiscal Year (e.g., State FY 1989/1990 - Federal FY 1990). 5. Several individual projects of the same "project type" requiring minimal funding should be combined into one application; individual cost estimates for each site must be included. 6. If an agency has an approved OHV grant' project currently going through the State's budget process, it should be assumed that it will be 'successfully funded. 7. A separate application for each different type of grant is required. 8. To reduce the bulk and cost of reproducing applications by the State for public review, fill each page (i.e., don't put each component on a separate page). APPLICATION COMPONENTS ITEM A APPLICATION FACE SHEET The California Depa.rtment of Parks and Recreation's DPR Form 565 (revised 12/99), Application for State Off-Highway Vehicle Grant, constitutes the face sheet for all formal grant application packages. Blank copies are provided in Figure 5. The following letters (A, B, C, etc.) correspond to the letters placed in the various sections of the sample face sheet (Figure 5). Instructions for the completion of each section are as follows. .. A. APPLICANT - Enter the title, mailing and street address of your agency. If a unit of your agency is acting as the lead, include the name of that sub-unit (e.g., Department of Public Works, Corning Ranger District, Barstow Resource Area, etc.). B. PROJECT TITLE - Short one to four word titles are ideal. For O&M grant applications, refer to the Project ~Title that was assigned to your previous year O&M grant and use the same format (e.g., Inyo NF O&M - 1993). C. VEHICLE TYPES ACCOMMODATED - Identify the type(s) of vehicles that will benefit from this project. The type codes are defined as follows: M/C - Motorcycle ATV All Terrain Vehicle 4WD - Four Wheel Drive OSV Snowmobile DB - Dune Buggy 11 D. AMOUNT REQUESTED - The total amount of grant funds requested, (rounded to $1,000's). We will fund one year grants; funds that will be expended within the fiscal year for which the funds are budgeted (federal agencies can utilize their related fiscal year - i.e., State FY 89/90 - Federal FY 1990). If a grant is complex and requires more than one year, a justification must be provided.(see Item F) E. NEAREST CITY - This section is self-explanatory. F. COUNTY NUMBER(s): Enter the number of the County/Counties that your grant area (forest, resource area, or park ) lies within. (See Appendix N) G. PROJECT SUB-ACTIVITIES - This information is critical for Compliance with legal mandates contained in the OHMVR Act of 1988. Identify any funds that will be used for ~ the listed sub-activities, regardless of the type of project for which you are applying. The sum of the three sub-activities need not equal your total grant request as some elements may not fall within the sub-activity eligibility guidelines. See Appendix B for definitions and examples of these project sub-activities. While this section is related primarily to-O&M and Resource Management projects, you should also complete this section if your planning or development project will benefit law enforcement, wildlife, or soil conservation efforts. Acquisition projects are not eligible for sub-actiVity credit. H. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION - Check the appropriate box. If you check the completed box, you must submit-the environmental document along with the application. Once the requested funding is budgeted, the Project Agreement (contract between the · -g~ar3tee and the State) cannot be exeCuted until all environmental documentation (NEPA & CEQA) is complete. I. APPLICANT'S AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AND CONTACT PERSONS This section identifies a two level chain of command. The authorized representative (#1) is the person having the ultimate approval and signature authority (e.g., BLM-State Director, USFS-Forest Supervisor, and Local Agency-Parks Director). The project administrator/coordinator (#2) is the person performing the overall implementation, fiscal coordination and oversees the implementation of the grant. J. PROJECT DESCRIPTION - Within the space provided briefly identify the nature of work to be accomplished with the requested OHV grant funds. K, SIGNED - The Authorized Representative must sign and date the application face sheet. By d°ing so, the agency acknowledges the conservation and law enforcement requirements of the program and is making a commitment thereto. (See Figure 5). ¸12 Figure 4 P A D R S E O L C E E A Q & A Q V S F U M N U E O E I N I L U T P . I"I"LII.;A/IU N ~ s o R Y U N I P C E REQUIREMENT G T u E . I E T MATRIX o . N T G T ITEM # COMPONENT TITLE PAGE A APPLICATION FACE SHEET (DPR 565) 16 A A A A A ,~ A B ONE PAGE COST SUMMARY 17 A A A A A A A C DETAILED COST ESTIMATE 17' ' A A A A A A A D O&M INCREASE/SURCHARGE 18 A JU. STIFICATION E OHV USER & PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 18 A A A A A A A F PROJECT EXTENSION JUSTIFICATION 18 .... * A G ~ OHV LAW ENFORCEMENT 19 A H GENERAL SITE MAP/PLAN 19 A A A A A I FUNDING/PHASING PRIORITIES 19 A A A A A A J NATIONAL ENV. POLICY ACT (NEPA) & 19 * A 'A A * * A CALIFORNIA'ENV. QUALITY ACT (CEQA) - K FACILITY SCHEDULE 20 L* L* .. * L MATCH NG FUNDS DESCRIPTION 20 A A * '1 L M GOVERNING BODY RESOLUTION 20 L L L L L L L N SUB-ACTIVITY NARRATIVE 20 A A A A O SUB-ACTIVITY COST ESTIMATES 20 A A A A P MONITORING SUMMARY 21 A A A F F Q RESOURCE DISCUSSION 21 A * * * F R ENDANGERED/THREATENED SPECIES MAP 21 A F . F F F S 1991 SOIL STANDARDS MAP 21 A A A F F T CONSERVATION ACTIVITIY 21 A A F U INVENTORY OF FEATURES 22 A V WILDLIFE HABITAT PROTECTION PROGRAM 22 A A A F F W TOXIC OR HAZARDOUS SITE SURVEY 22 A X INTIAL INVESTIGATION OF IMPACTS 22 A Y INTIAL INVESTIGATION ON WATER QUALITY 22 A Appendix K PROJ. ACCOMPLISHMENT REPORT (PAR) 45 A Appendix L INVENTORY OF OHV PURCHASED EQUIP, 46 A Use the following codes to determine the application requirement by applying jurisdiction and by type of project: F = FEDERAL AGENCIES L = LOCAL AGENCIES A = ALL AGENCIES · = AS APPLICABLE (See Instructions!) 13 Figure 5 State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION Division of Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation APPLICATION FOR STATE OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE GRANT See Manual for Instructions APPUCANT (Naroe and Address): ' PROJECT TITLE (4 Words Maximuro) Title Address oty B State Zip A VEHICLE TYPE AMOUNT REQUESTED (Total Grant Amount) F'I ~c E] ~v 4w~ El osv I-I ~ C $ (round to $1,000) D NEAREST CITY: COUNTY NUMBER (S) E F COST BY SUB-ACTIVITIES (.C&E): ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION (Check one): Conservation $. [] Exempt (Exclusion or Exemption included) Restoration G $- [] Completed (Documentation*included) Enf~'cement $. H TOTAL C&E -- $. APPLICANTS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AND CONTACT PERSONS 0'YPE DO NOT SIGN) 1) I Authorized Representative Title Phone Number 2) Project Administration/Coordination Contact Title Phone Number PROJECT DESCRIPTION (State specifically what you will do with the requested funds) J _The undersigned understands and does hereby promise to meet the requirements of CCR Section 4970.13.soil survey/monitoring, wildlife habitat survey/management and OHV law enforcement programs/activities will be complete and/or implemented, as applicable, pursuant to Section 5090.53 & 5090.55.of the Public Resources Code I certify that this project conforms with appropriate land use plans, CEQA, and all other required environmental documentation PRC - 5090.55(b). SIGNED: K Authorized Representative Only Date OPR 565 (Rev. 12Y99) ITEM B 'ONE PAGE COST SUMMARY This component is primarily applicable to an application .involving multiple sites, areas, districts, parks, etc., or a lengthy detailed cost estimate. The intent of this summary is to condense the costs into major categories of.expenses. For the required format of this item see Appendix D. ITEM C DETAILED COST ESTIMATE(S) Cost estimates should allow for cost increases, during the time between preparation of the grant application and when the funds* actually become available (16 months). Once a project is budgeted, grant funds cannot be added to the project without going through the State Budget process. The Division will entertain one year O&M grant applications. For large grants or complicated grants, an extension may be requested discussed under "Item F". If you are requesting concurrent funding for a previously funded phase, it should be triggered by the actual or anticipated completion of the previously funded phase. While we cannot guarantee the availability of funds for subsequent phases, priority consideration can be given to those requests. The estimate must identify all of the costs associated with the project. Required matching funds or your own contrib, uted funds are to be subtracted out at the end of the estimate, the remaining balance represents the actual amount of your grant request. When one application is being submitted that encompasses several distinct sites or areas, include an individual cost estimate for each (i.e., Appendix C, Item C) and a Summarized Estimate for all (i.e., Appendix C, Item B). The purchase of all equipment must be specific line items in the cost estimate. Equipment is considered to be anything motorized and anything of a durable nature with a useful life beyond the term of this specific application. Minor items such as hand tools may be lumped as such. Appendix "J" lists the maximum grant funding allowed for equipment items. Refer to Appendix D for sample cost estimate formats. Cost estimates should be neither too detailed nor too vague. For example identify a lump sum for O&M materials/supplies as opposed to the cost of each item. In a second example, the cost for construction of a restroom should be identified as opposed to a list of the actual construction materials. Be sure to include costs for such things as inflation, contingencies, engineering, design, contract administration, etc., as applicable. Each should be listed as an individual line item and the rate (percentage) must be identified. 15 Lastly, direct and/or indirect administrative costs or surcharges must be specific line items or they will be disallowed when the project is audited. The rate (percentage) must also be identified. If you charge more than 10% for either, you must provide a justification and/or explanation under Item D. Equipment usage rates, for equipment purchased and owned by you, may include fuel, maintenanCe, repairs, and replacement costs proportionate to the extent that the equipment will be used to accomplish this specific grant project. If the equipment was previously purchased with OHV grant funds (all or in part), the State will only allow charges for fuel, maintenance, and repairs (replacement costs cannot be chained)). "Replacement costs" refer to Such things as fixed ownership rates, working capital funds, capitalized equipment rates, etc. ITEM D O&M INCREASE If the O&M grant is requesting considerably more than the previous year a justification must be. provided. Excluding any.equipment purchases in both years, if you request more than the current inflation index over last year's approved amount, a justification must be provided. Realistic arguments may include increases in visitation, new trails or facilities coming on line, catastrophic -occurrences, etc. A justification and/or explanation must be provided if you charge more than 10% for direct and/or indirect surcharges (administrative costs). ITEM E OHV USER AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Discuss the means.by which recreationists & general public were involved during the development of this specific grant application and summarize their sentiments. All letters of opposition and support -shall be included with the application. Off-Highway vehicle users and public input must be specific to this grant application. ITEM F PROJECT EXTENSION JUSTIFICATION The State generally requires that OHV grant projects be implemented and completed within one budget year. If a grant will require more than one year to complete a statement to justify an extension is required. 16 ITEM G OHV LAW ENFORCEMENT All O&M projects and new acquisition or development projects require enforcement of OHV registration, vehicle operation, and vehiCle equipment laws. The level and extent of your law enforcement program must be identified; as it applies to OHV recreation in your jurisdiction. Each O&M grant or cooperative agreement shall include a law enforcement plan that identifies existing law enforcement problems and a description of how this grant or cooperative Agreement will solve those problems. Past OHV law enforcement efforts shall be identified (e.g., numbers of citations, types of citations, numbers of enforcement-related contacts, physical arrests, hours committed to enforcement). Law enforcement tasks shall include but not be limited to enforcement of the following: checking spark arresters and current registration; checking compliance with noise requirements; prevention of illegal activity ,that may result in resource damage or trespass; enforcement of alcohol-related laws and OHV_related search and rescue. The law enforcement plan shall also include the following; 1) a map of the areas, routes, and corridors that will be patrolled and enforced with OHV funds; 2) an identification of the number and classification of law enforcement personnel involved implementing the OHV project; 3) a schedule of the patrols that will be conducted and the classification of law enforcement personnel used (e.g., Level 4-Law Enforcement Officer (LEO), 10 weekends, or sergeant, 10 weekends); 4) the number, Price and type of enforcement signs to be purchased and installed and 5).the cost of educational materials such as displays or brochures to be purchased with OHV funds. ITEM H GENERAL SITE MAP/PLAN Provide a general site map of the area that depicts the project or OHV opportunity area boundaries, primary passenger vehicle routes leading to and within those boundaries, and, to the extent possible, the primary OHV roads and trails. For acquisition projects, also identify the general property location on the map. For development projects, also provide a general site plan (conceptual development plan). (See Appendices G&H). ITEM I FUNDING/PHASING PRIORITIES In anticipation of insufficient OH¥ grant funds being available for all projects with merit, use this item to state your funding and/or phasing desires. What priority does this application have in comparison to the other applications you are submitting. This can be stated simply as "Priority #1 out of 5", "Priority #2 out' of 5", etc. Additionally, if this specific project could possibly be funded and accomplished in "phases", briefly summarize the cost and scope of each phase. While we cannot guarantee the availability of funds for the subsequent phases, priority consideration can be given to those requests. If an equipment grant is dependent upon funding of a related O&M grant, it should be noted: 17 ITEM J NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (NEPA) & CALIFORIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) All grant projects shall be examined for potential impacts regardless of type. Federal and local agencies shall submit the appropriate environmental documents with the application. In most cases, equipment and safety grants are exempt; a categorical exemption or exclusion must be prepared and submitted with the application. Note that the OHMVR Division must review all NEPA documents for CEQA comparability per 5090.55 (b); and additional information may be required from the applicants. This review process shall be completed prior to the Project Agreement being certified by the Division. Environmental documentation must be written for the Project, not the entire program (see Figure 4). ITEM K FACILITY SCHEDULE Local agencies m.ust identify the days and hours the OHV f,~cility will 'or will not be open for casual OHV recreation. An estimate of the number of organized competition events that are likely to be conducted on an annual basis must also be identified. Competition means an organized event requiring registration, an entrance fee, and includes scoring and awards. ITEM L MATCHING FUNDS DESCRIPTION Local agencies must identify the source of the matching funds or services that they are required to provide for O&M-projects. All safety type grants and cooperative agreements require a 25%'match. ITEM M GOVERNING BODY RESOLUTION Appendix E proVides a sample Governing Body Resolution, which is required for all local government agencies. It can be modified slightly to suit your specific type of application or to comply with any idiosyncrasies of your jurisdiction. The clerk of the governing body must certify the~ resolution. ITEM N CONSERVATION, REHABILITATION AND ENFORCEMENT SUB-ACTIVITY NARRATIVES Provide a brief and concise narrative describing the specific activities to be accomplished with the funds identified for each sub-activity on the application face sheet (Item A). Refer to Appendix B for more details regarding the sub-activity. 18 SCHEDULED MEETINGS JANUARY 2003 THROUGH DECEMBER 2003 BAKERSFIELD CiTY COUNCIL '"~ 2~ by F~{eso on bio ! REG. MTG. (~7PM BUDGET MEETING & PRESENTATIONS WORKSHOPS @ 5:15PM Monday's (g~ Noon, Wednesday's @ 5:15pm Hearing on 6/I I, Adoption on 6/25 ~Urban Development Meetings (3:00 p.m through April, 1:00 p.m. Holidays - City Hall Closed Joint City/County Meeting JARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE_ TH F S 5 6 7 12 t3 14 19 20 21 26 27 28 IULY AUGUST EPTEMBER ~ER DEi ~ 3J 10~ 1t } 31i S:\JOHN\Council Committees\Urban Development 2003\2003 Urban Development Meetings Urban Development Committee - Open referrals as of 2/26/03 1. Freeway Status Report - Standing Referral 2. Transportation Development Fees - Referred by Couch 6/16/99 3. Shellabarger Road Referred by Couch 3/15/00 4. Leaf BloWers - Referred by Hanson 7/31/02 5. Commercial and Industrial Development (wall heiqht & standards) - Referred by Couch 6/27/01 6. Minimum Residential Lot Sizes - Referred by Couch 9/19/01 7. Landscape Ordinance Enforcement - Referred by Benham 5/8/02 8. City Space Needs - Referred by. Couch 2/06/02 9. Incentives for Oevelopers to Include water and art tn projects, Referred by Couch 3/20/02 10. Future operation of Bakersfield Airport. Referred by N~aggard 8/21/02 11. Joint City/County Planning Commission. Referred by Couch 9/9/02 12. In-fill Development / Smart Growth Correspondence. Referred by Couch 7/10/02 13. Off Road Vehicle Recreation Facility - Referred by Maggard 10/02/02 14. Placement of Stop St.~n~ - Referred by Couch 11/6/02 15. 51de Yard Setbacks - Referred by Couch 11/20/02 16. Additional revtew of issues' related to the GPAJEIR Referred by Couch, Benham E 6Aaggard 12/11/02 17. Ordinance re. Multi-Family Resident!a! - Referred 'by Couch 12/11/02 18. CNG Fleet Vehicles - Referred by A6aggard 12/11/02 19. GEAR Electric Vehtcle- Referred by Couch 12/11/02 20. Commercial Oevelopment - Overnight Parktng in Lots - Referred by N~aggard 2/12/03 21. Zoning Process - Big Box Centers - Referred by Couch 2/12/03 22. Northeast Bluffs - Referred by A6aggard 2/12/03 23. Highway 99 -Scentc Corridor - Referred by Benham 2/26/03